As is almost always the case, our gentle readers were ahead of the curve again on the latest Marshall White Center story, which was reported in this morning's Standard-Examiner. We were "tipped off" by email about this late last week; and there were comments on other threads earlier this week.
In a nutshell, The Ogden City Administration is reportedly preparing to entertain an offer from the Salvation Army, to receive "in swap" a parcel of downtown property at 26th and Grant, in exchange for Ogden City's Marshall White Center property.
Inasmuch as the Marshall White Center topic seems to be of interest to Weber County Forum readers, even at this early stage of the proceedings, we thought it appropriate to now set up a separate discussion thread.
What say our gentle readers? Is it a good idea to consider "swapping" Marshall White for a plot of land closer to Ogden's central business district? Would the Salvation Army, a well-respected (and well-heeled) charitable organization, be a good and appropriate steward for this important Ogden city cultural institution? Is "privatization" a good idea here, given the heavy financial burden the city bears in operating this "landmark" cultural amenity? Do any of our gentle readers have additional information on this transaction that goes beyond the paltry fact-set that has become public information to date?
Have at it, gentle readers.
Let's hear your gentle and thoughtful comments on this subject.
© 2005 - 2014 Weber County Forum™ -- All Rights Reserved
23 comments:
Well, it's not just the land swap that's important here. In fact, that's really a secondary matter. The real question is: Can/will the Salvation Army maintain [and perhaps expand, but at least maintain] the present level and variety of services available to the several "communities" that rely on the MW Center?
Since I don't know either what services are offered now and who uses them, or how the MWC users feel about the proposed change, or what committment the Salvation Army has or will make regarding maintenance of those services, I have no opinion [yet] on the proposed transfer.
There is another matter, though. The Salvation Army is a religious organization, and a prostelyzing one to some extent. Which raises the question of whether users of the MWC will be comfortable using services and facilities provided by a Christian and prostelyzing group.
Now, I know the SA has a good reputation along these lines with regard to being very sensitive about such matters. My father, serving in CBI Theater in WWII, sang their praises for providing help of all sorts to GIs there, no questions asked, from cold Cokes to emergency contact for families and much else besides. But still, I wonder if having the MWC center operated by a [oh, ok, I'll use The Shrub's term for it]"faith-based organization" will create any problems.
Once again, I don't know. Just raising it as something to think about. Should what have been civic responsibilities be transferred to a religious organization? Is that wise policy?
Repeated from prior thread:
Seems like I remember not too long ago that the Salvation Army was tapped out and had to shut down it's Drug treatment programs?
The SA is a great organization, but is this the right thing for the citizens of Ogden? Or is this only the right thing for Ogden the future Ski Resort at the bottom of the Gondola?
In my opinion it is only one more indication of Godfrey's contempt for the poor and people of color in Ogden. I think he is an arrogant little racist pig.
In light of Asque's post, and in the spirit of cooperation and good citizenhip, I again offer my house to the Mayor and Lift Ogden crowd, now, as is, for only four times what I paid for it four years ago. In Ogden. Since we are soon to be the new Aspen/Park City [pick one], and house prices will rise at least to at least eight times their current value, just for openers, the buyer will clearly make out like a bandit on this. Such a deal! I made the offer before, but oddly, there did not ensue a bidding war for my property among the Lift Ogden crowd. Can't understand why....
How about if Godfrey gets rid of his million dollar brain trust?
That's right One million friggen dollars plus per year he pays these yes men suits that he surrounds himself with.
There is at least four or five of them, at around $100,000. per year each, plus full supporting staff, cars, perks, vacations, retirement bonuses, plus god only knows what kind of secret handshake deals at the end.
The guy himself costs the people at least $150,000 per year in salary, perks and such.
In addition he payes Stuart Reid about $75,000 per year to "manage" the BDO, which of course is already managed by Boyer for 50% of the action!
And to top that insult off, Reid doesn't even have to show up if he doesn't want to.
This circle of incompetents accomplish nothing for the citizens of Ogden. None of the BS that they come up with works. It all just costs more millions of dollars. Wasted salaries on worthless people to waste more money. It is a vicious cycle, and it alll comes straight out of our pockets.
None of them could make it in private industry. At least a couple of them are rejects from Salt Lake. They are about the most sorry lot of pretenders that have ever set foot in Ogden, and they are draining the city treasury dry.
All that money they are walking with could go a long way to help the citizens of Ogden, the Marshall White Center, the Golf Course, the broken down sewer, the water system, and on and on.
Curm-
You have an important point-
I suspect many participate in programs offered by the MWC because they are not faith based.
If operations were turned over to a faith based like the Salvation Army, sSome strong safeguards would need to be in place to protect the rights of those utilizing the MWC, the integrity of the groups involved and the interests of Ogden City taxpayers. Could people participating in programs at MWC face unwanted pressure to participate in religious exercises? What would be done to prevent discrimination in hiring based on religious grounds? Would exisitng dedicated staff be kept?
Look at the issues brough up with Bush's charitable choice policy. Do we really need to create those in Ogden City government?
The seniors who use MWC are really upset about Godfrey trying to sell the center. As reported in the SE, they contacted Council Members Gracia, Glasmann and Jeske and met with them last Friday. I understand that they have a petition for people who are against selling it to sign.
Also according to a Council Member someone on the Council received a call from a retired Salvation Army Major, who says this deal won't work financially and that the SA would be really strapped if they proceed, maybe losing the thing somewhere down the road. He said there are too many drunks and addicts who would show up at the SA
door, and that's no environment to expose young people to and NO WAY to keep the area clean. He said that he has grave concerns about
this as per finances, and is against it.
Even if the City loses money providing a community center for the citizens, they should keep the Center and do it. Cities weren't incorporated to be a profit-making entity -- their job is to provide needed services to citizens. Wherever did Godfrey get the idea that community centers, museums, golf courses HAVE TO MAKE MONEY?! I thought he was more savy than that.
All who have posted on this thread have made some good points. The little Napolean won't give up until he has sold all of the public property that the City owns, and if he had his way would use eminent domain on privately-owned property until Ogden was totally Godfreyized. He's proven that he doesn't care about Ogden and cares even less about the residents. You're right, Oz Boy, he holds EVERYONE in contempt!
Does it seem to you that the Allen/ Godfrey clan are intent on creating a Kennedyesque Dynasty??
Their egos would support that supposition. The difference may be that Allen isn't into bootleg booze....but selling and swapping city land for commercial enterprise IS their drug of choice.
The MWC is vital to the citizens...especially the youth who are latch-key kids in many instances and need a safe place to be after school.
Having the SA running the place doesn't bother me. I have not seen them prosyletize and they are upstanding in their dealings.
I am concerned, however, that as Curt observes, the SA may not be able to AFFORD the costs of keeping it going as a cultural and after school, etc. enterprise. Also, that former SA major makes a good point. I think we'd see too many druggies, drunks and other undesirables down there and the youth and seniors would be at grave risk.....thus curtailing people enjoying activities after dark.
Councilman Glassman has a history with the MWC. I hope he keeps an eye on the mayor and his minions on this one!
Can the SA maintain the MWC from "kettle donations?"
Will the drunks and addicts really understand that their programs have been moved to SLC and not seek refuge at their new home, the MWC, after a torturous, weekend bender?
Will the current activities at the MWC remain the same?
Will the cost of entry remain the same?
Will the youth of Ogden be welcome the the SA/MWC and, most importantly, feel welcome there?
Many questions to answer, these being a few to start with.
March 20, 2006 7:02 PM
The first question to ask is what experience does the Salvation Army have in owning and operating a joint facility for young people and older citizens.
To my knowledge this is not their usual modus operandi.
Speaking as a senior citizen it is my opinion that mixing seniors with teenagers is not going to work. The two groups have no focus on common interests.
Besides, Ogden already has its Golden Hours Center which furnishes a much needed function.
Is the plan to also do away with that Center to save more money in order to pay for all these high priced experts?
Hey, Rudi and all you Republicans out there. Go to your caucus meets tomorrow night and make a little noise. Let them know you don't like the little Republican's plan to sell off Mt. Ogden Park to a real estate developer, or to privatize the MW Center. You guys can do more good that way at your caucus than I can do at mine. Show up. Make some waves. I and Mrs. Curmudgeon intend to at our Caucus, but being Dems, the effect will be limited. You guys can do some good. Give it a shot.
Maybe, just maybe the little dick head isn't really trying to sell of the Marshall White Center at all!
He might just be bluffing to get every one's shorts in a knot. That includes the five council persons that actually have some integrity. Then he can do a little horse trading and get them to back his Gondola deal in exchange for sparing the Marshall White Center! They will get to be hero's for saving the Center and he will get his friggen Gondola.
This idea was thrown at me by a very clever and astute friend of mine on the phone tonight. At first I scoffed at the idea, then it struck me that this wise man may very well be on to something!
It appears that lord Godfrey does have the upper hand so far with this new council, and he is a devious little prick. I wouldn't put it past him. The question is - are they sufficiently brow beaten to let him pull a stunt like this over on them?
Stay tuned, only the shadow knows.
Dorothy, that mix is already in play at the MWC.
Ozboy, I heard that scenario was in play with the Firefighters but didn't get over the hump.
But politics being politics....
I'm not too sure about the "upper hand over the new council." There was a little problem with Ernest; SB 229 passed, but that was really a State action....when it got to town, where it should be, the council sent down their Resolution which basically negates 229 for several years; the Episcopal Church deal was in most part spearheaded by the council, especially the newbies (Glassman was always bringing that issue up, at RDA, CC, anywhere/anytime Boyer or the Administration dealt publically with the Mall site; many of the other issues, Fresinius, etc., have been dealt with realistically and with the community's best interests at heart.
The Mayor is a very smart guy; has a team that stands tall with pretty much anyone; researches and plans to the hilt. Part time councilmembers might have a tough time going up against them, especially the new ones who have yet to get their feet on the ground (some are learning that, like with the Administration, there's much to method and process in order to accomplish one's goals).
Actually, there has yet to be a real, earth-shaking, substantial issue, one that has demanded lines to be drawn in the sand, come before the 2 governmental bodies. But, with the gondola might on the horizon, I think that that will soon change.
I think it's more of a coucnil "Learning Curve" at this time, rather than having the "upper hand;" but then, re-thinking what I just wrote, I guess he probably would have the upper hand, if needed, wouldn't he? I'm optimistic, however, since ONLY the first few chapters have been written thus far, in this book that's destined to be rather lengthy.
Fascinating stuff, yes? Can't wait to see how things play out.
Curm...you and the missus are welcome at the Republican caucus in your neighborhood...just register as a Repub...cuz it ain't too late to repent!
Dorothy, the MWC has a pool that everyone can enjoy, and the seniors apparently need for medical reasons.
The SA has experience with a wonderful work/drug therapy/ rehab facility in Portland, OR.
They have turned lives around.
I don't think Godfrey has brot up the MWC swap as a diversion and hammer over the heads of the council. They are too smart for that, and he could have just been open and honest with the people in the first place. The firefighters didn't cave.
The council didn't cave over the civil service comm. dump that Godfrey and Johnson orchestrated.
The SE today quotes Brandon's opposition to keeping the CCS...and Safsten's quote just shows his ususal waffling. But, he voted the right way with the other 4 members of the council.
Trentleham brings up the mayor's UNtrustworthiness today. Not scathing, but at least a start that the SE isn't going to give Godfrey a complete pass on his sneakiness and secret deals.
Let's keep looking for a good mayoral candidate to back!!!
PERSONALLY, I think both REPUBLICANS and DEMOCRATS (at least at the national level) are terribly corrupt! We need new parties - parites that will do it right! Yes, I know I am dreaming.....
yes, dear. Where's the bugler? You do need to wake up, and go to your caucus meeting and be part of the process....or else all us 'corrupt' radicals will continue to run everything!
Or, so I read in the SE editorial. Wonder if Porter, et al, are attending their's?
Sharon:
I am delighted to see that you can admit, in front of God and everybody, that you are a Republican. That is very encouraging, because being able to admit it is the first step toward recovery!
All the best,
Curudgeon
I DID wake up Sharon - I USED to BE a republican! I'm not sure yet but I THINK I might be a "curmudgeon democrat". ;)
If George the Bush and the midget at city hall are Republicans, then I be a Democrat! I never liked crowds anyway.
You donkeys are so cute! Really.
Hizzoner, however, is NOT a Republican.....but, the non-thinkers who voted him in were told that he is!! Signing the registration form got him into the caucus and he's been fooling the folks ever since.! Daddy-in-law covers the Demo side and Jr the repubs....is't that how they control everything in this town?
Curmie, Arcritic, Armysarge, and Ozboy....you all would drool over the Repub Party Platform...it's your style!!! No room for asses.
ella..The platform may be just fine. Reps and Dems both have platforms. The problem is they are meaningless...totally ignored.
The r's have violated almost every basic princple tenet they ever had. THAT is why I am no more! And, that does NOT translate to becoming a dem.....
ella..The platform may be just fine. Reps and Dems both have platforms. The problem is they are meaningless...totally ignored.
The r's have violated almost every basic princple tenet they ever had. THAT is why I am no more! And, that does NOT translate to becoming a dem.....
Ella:
Well, I'll try to read the Republican platform, but if it contains anything at all about "fiscal responsibility" I'm afraid I'll be laughing too hard after that to make any sense of the rest....
well, it does make reference to, curm, of respecting life. Even low life forms like godfrey, allen, mosher, larsen, et al. Even IF abortion were retroactive, they'd be allowed to live.
Now it's up to 'the white hats', (oh 'scuse me....is that not PC?) to squash and squelch 'em.
New comments are not allowed.