By The Lovely JenniferHaving just read M. Godfrey's "guest editorial" in yesterday's paper, I must express my dismay. Back in November, the very same Mr. Godfrey expressed rather vehemently his feelings on how "un-scientific" the Weber State University research project regarding Mr. Peterson's development proposal was. Is he now thinking that his method is more scientific?
If Mr. Peterson wants input from the community, and Mr. Godfrey wants to keep it scientific, then why on earth did they NOT randomly (this, scientifically) select members of the community for input? They instead opted for the very un-scientific "investigator-bias" method of choosing certain (known only to Mr. P and Mr. G) members of the community, who for sure do NOT represent a scientific – and representative – sampling of all the members of the community Mr. Godfrey represents - i.e. the ones who voted for him.
I fear most of the "Community" Godfrey refers to in his editorial have been dis-included: The Flores family, the Tollini Family, the McLaughlin family and the Jones family from the neighborhoods around Ogden High and Central; the Neil family, the Smith family, the Taylor family from the north end of the Ogden community; the Wells and the Watts families who live near the canyon. They are every bit a part of Mr. Godfrey's community as are the Lindquist family and the Marquardt family and the Hall family.
All these families and more might appreciate being chosen to contribute input to Mr. Peterson. Invitations to some sort of town meeting might have been appropriate.
Then the process could be continued, once the developer and the community feel comfortable with the plans and the wants and the needs of all concerned.
Comments, anyone?
