As Per Usual, the neoCON Standard-Examiner editors were all weepy-eyed and bawling around March 6 of this year, bemoaning their constantly-declining and increasingly-illiterate readership, and the prospective Wal-Mart advertising money that was suddenly snatched from their grasp when Senator Curt Bramble ushered in last year's Senate Bill 184. This legislation clipped the wings of the socialist municipal land-grabbers, and brought to a sudden halt the evil practice of taking people's homes and businesses away, and transferring their properties to giant multinational corporations like Wal-Mart.
The shameless lackeys of the "Suits from Sanduskey" published a petulant editorial on March 6, 2006, which brought tears of joy and redemption to the eyes of all statist central planners and schemers. Big Government Socialist Lackeys all over Weber County were passing around the kleenexes, sniffling, boo-hoo-hooing, and accusing Senator Bramble of rank hypocrisy with this year's SB 245 -- patting the neoCON Std-Ex editors on the back all the while.
Here's the naive and preposterous Std-Ex piece, just in case you missed it.
Senator Bramble contributed his common-sense retort to the "local rag" today, and set the record straight. You can read the whole article here.
And the answer is NO! Senator Curt Bramble IS NOT a hypocrite, as you'll conclude when you read his article. On the contrary, he's a hero to property rights advocates and all true Americans everywhere.
As usual, the business-inexperienced and ad revenue-grubbing Std-Ex editors over-generalized, missed the point and set up a mendacious strawman.
Hello Standard-Examiner editors: Taking away people's homes and businesses, and giving them to giant multinational corporations is morally wrong!
Curt Bramble knows that. Over 95% of the American people know that, according to national polls. The Ogden townsfolk know that too.
So WTF is wrong with the Standard-Examiner editors, we ask?
Here it is again: Seizing people's homes and businesses and giving them to Wal-Mart is morally wrong. The Std-Ex editors should write this down so they don't forget it.
So should the botched "little Napoleon on nine."
Comments, anyone?
© 2005 - 2014 Weber County Forum™ -- All Rights Reserved
33 comments:
Link is not working for me on Bramble artlcle
The City Council should set aside a special day each year to honor Senator Bramble for the great service he has done for all property owners in Ogden and the State of Utah.
He is a true patriot and statesman and a defender of the right. He should wear a "CTR" ring as he actually practices that principal, unlike some disengenuous midgets in our local government.
Long live Senator Bramble.
Long live Dorothy Littrell.
Long live the Ogden resistance.
Thank you for recognizing Senator Bramble's service to every citizen of Utah.
He continues to lead the charge to protect all our property rights.
Governor Huntsman deserves a "Thank You" as well for having the wisdom to actually sign the Bramble Senate bill on eminent domain so that it became law.
This eminent domain fight has been one of the highlights of my lifetime experience with fighting to effect needed government changes.
I would also like to thank all the rest of the persons who helped win this battle on the local level in Ogden.
You will always be in my heart.
Can someone explain to me what the exception means to the Geneva project? And why exactly making an exception (that everyone agreed on) is not hypocritical?
I am actually fine with the demise of ED for RDA's. Though I think there will come a time when it will be used as an investment tool by someone looking to make a killing on a property in a potential RDA blighted area. But so be that.
Because, Arcritic, Geneava is TRUE blite.
Pure and real simple.
Siezing homes for the benefit of private entities like Wal-Mart makes about as much sense as selling off public park lands for the benefit of millionaire ski-resort developers and gated-development million dollar home buyers. And no one would be foolish enough ever to propose that. Right?
When I met Rob Jolley, your Ogden City lobbyist, (also Sandy City)...he said that Mayor Godfrey had given him 3 assignments:
1. "Get SB 229 passed" (abolish Civil Service Commissions). He won that one.
2. "Eminent Domain"
Jolley said, "I told Johnson and the Mayor that it won't fly this yr and to take it off the table. They did. Jenkins pulled it," but we think Bramble will go with it next yr."
3. "The Gondola". "It's not an issue this yr, because the Mayor doesn't have a plan."
Well, we know better than that!
For anyone still naive enough to think that Jolley represents the Council's wishes and interests, he told me that he 'represents Sandy City and Ogden City...I don't work for the Council."
Of course, your former council appropriated the dough for his salary.
The Council tonight okayed a resolution NOT to abolish the Civil Service Commission, thus keeping protections for our firefighters and police officers.
The "exception" for the Geneva project addresses the limit on the size of the RDA projects and the fact that the property is located in two cities, Orem and Vineyard.
RDAs under the unban renewal track contained in SB196 are limited to 100 acres or less. Typically, an abandoned industrial site is far larger than that. The Geneva property is over 1,800 acres.
SB245 provides another definition of blight that was not part of SB196, the larger RDA reform bill.
SB245 defines a site as blighted under the following criteria: If the site is over 1,000 acres, and if the site requires remediation for hazardous or solid waste, and if the site is occupied by an inactive or abandoned factory, smelter, or other heavy industrial facility, then it meets the defintion of blight. SB245 also contains a provision that the project area can extend 1,500 feet beyond the abandoned facility. This allows Orem and Vineyard to jointly participate in one RDA even thought it spans two cities.
Nothing in SB245 contradicts the prohibition of eminent domain, spending other entities money, etc., that are contained in the larger RDA reform bill.
If a site, including the Geneva site, meet the criteria, then the property may qualify as an RDA for tax increment financing. This has nothing to do with the ifficulties Ogden seems to face.
Curt Bramble
Utah Senate, District 16
Anonymous, it's someone like you who not only discourages people of substance, people who have something definitive and enlightening to say, to not post on this blog. Your trashy language is an embarassment to all of us who read and write here. My apologigies to Sen Bramble....we're not all a bunch of cloven-hoofed idiots up here.
Anon's latest post [no. 9 in this string] is a good example of why I do not endorse a "post all no matter what" policy on bulletin boards given to... or hoping to encourge... serious discussion of public matters. Monitoring, lightly administered, seems the best policy to achieve that end. Would that it were otherwise, but so long as middle-schoolers have access to the internet and can post freely, hoping to pass as grown ups [however misplaced that hope might be], I think light moderating is probably a good idea.
The offensive post has been deleted.
I don't believe its one of our regular trolls, however.
The poster seems to have arrived here from The Senate Site," where a link to this article was posted a few hours ago.
I checked the poster's IP address. It's a NEW one; and it seems to be a dope who just wandered in.
Is it true Sharon Beech slapped Geiger Jr?
I heard she did from an eye witness.
Just reiterates an observation made in the "America needs to Clean Up It's Act" Post where Moroni McConkie observed...
"To me, Sharon's tirade is a prime example of incivility."
Appears her actions now reflect her words.
Oh Harbinger, don't get your kidneys in an uproar!
Since there wasn't a gentleman of your stature and gentility there to defend civility.....I took care of the odious situation myself.
However, before you run off to the pub with your observations...Bob and I have had a gracious conversation and 'made up'.
Sharon the SMACKER...Kudo's! You should be proud of yourself and not listen to any of these lemmings.
You'd have a sore hand if you slapped all the people on my list that I'd like to send you out to slap...Geiger SR, Godfrey, Saffsten, Stephenson, Stuart Reid, Utmormon, Dori Mosher, Prizzby, Peterson, Patterson, etc...Just for starts.
Little Bob needed a good bitch-slapping, I'm guessing. He's been constantly gaining anti-social momentum and rage, these past few weeks.
After he got "bitch-slapped." his daddy Curt should have sent the little girlie-man to his room.
We'll see in the future whether a little "parental discipline" works with the "loose-cannon kid."
Maybe there's a reason he's no longer in the U.S.M.C. CorPse.
methinks young Bob may be feeling overshadowed by dad. Perhaps some anger therapy would help him regain his equilibrium.
Of course, if he's always been naughty, then another trip to the woodshed could be therapuetic.....with a detour to the sink to have a little taste of soap!
If I was Bobby's Dad I would have taken the lad outside and planted a large boot up his ass. The little shit is a weasle faced little brat.
But Daddy didnt do anything, so what kind of a satand up guy is he?
Oh, that's right. the Mayor's guiding light, the pillar of salt in the community.
Sharon should hasve beat the hell out of the brat.
It is my opinion that you are being a bit unfair to Bob.
I think he is a stand up guy that ferverently believes in what he is promoting. He may get carried away sometimes, but that doesn't make him a bad guy.
However, I do not believe in any of this stuff that he and the Godfreyites are trying to do, and will work against it at every turn.
I think both Geigers, father and son, are sincere in their beliefs and do not have any ulterior motives - like getting rich off the tax payers money.
Incidently, this belief of mine does not extend to the little lord hisself, and most of his followers, especially the fat cats, and we all know who they are.
Semper Fi Bob, don't let the bastards get your goat.
I'm not sure what was said in the deleted comment but I think some of the later posts could use some moderation as well. Sounds like a bunch of jr. high kids .
Thank you Sen. Bramble. I guess the exception the Std. Ex. was looking to get for Ogden must have been ED.
And while I am not for eminent domain as Ogden was trying to use it, I also think there are and will be times when projects that would be good for the community will end up going nowhere because someone, either because of greed, stubornness or simply because they really don't want to sell, will refuse to sell at a reasonable price.
I am still trying to decide where I am on this issue. I know I was against what Ogden was trying to do in the WalMart deal, and I was pretty much against what they did in the River Project as well, but I just think that there will come a time when most everyone will think an owner should sell for the good of everyone and they won't.
I guess many here can never imagine a situation like that. I can.
I think deep down I would have a hard time trying to come up with rules that would be satisfying to curb the abuse but still allow the truly deserving project a chance.
arcritic:
The deleted post dealt exclusively with body parts and cuss words.
On eminent domain powers, your post seems to me to be right on the money. What created all the hoo raw, here and elsewhere, was government abuse of quite sensible rules involving "blighted" areas. But when one municipality designated wild land that had never been built upon as "blighted land" in order to justify an RDA district, and another, in New Jersey I think, declared a neatly kept lower middle class neighborhood "blighted" to justify taking and selling to condo developers just to improve the town's tax base, people rose up in justifiable anger. And, as often happens, they sometimes as a result threw out the baby with the bath water.
I'm afraid the solution --- the only solution --- is for folks to take the time and care to elect good people to office. Those who will not abuse their powers by creative [to be polite about it] readings of quite reasonable regulations and laws.
Don't hold your breath. It is sadly true that most of those eligible to vote pretty much ignore municipal government until they get exercised about some outrage... and that means, only after the fact. [Look at the turnout percentages for Ogden's recent municipal elections, e.g.] I wish I had a solution. But you are right: no matter how we might craft a law on eminent domain takings, it would still be subject to unethical interpreting [and so abuse] by elected officials.
There was a time in Poland where "most everyone" thought that the jew's property should be confiscated and they should be "relocated" to the east and placed in "work" camps - for the "greater good".
In regard to Eminent Domain: Despite what I regard as a cowardly decision by the United States Supreme Court, the Constitution is very clear on this. Land may be taken (and compensation given) for public USE!
It says NOTHING about the public good, public betterment, more tax revenue, or whatever term the legal beagles may create. If a person does not WANT to sell, that person has that right. Period!!
Sarge
Unfortunately our Supreme's decided that projected economic development, decided by community elected boards, does in fact qualify as a "public use"
This has been the most derisive issue decided by the court in many years. People all across America have risen up in protest over this decision. Legislatures in the majority of the states have been besieged by angry citizens, and those legislatures are, for the most part, writing into state's laws prohibitions against this evil practice.
Poll after poll across the country have shown that American citizens in overwhelming majorities, some as high as 95%, think this eminent domain issue is morally repugnant.
Incidendlly, eminent domain for legitimate public use like highways, schools, etc. is still in play in Utah, and the rest of the country, and is not what has the public outraged. It is the notion that politicians can take your home and give it to some company like Wall-Mart just so they can have bigger city budgets to lord over.
I am very much looking forward to the next Ogden election where we can kick these three remaining little minded men, who whole heartedly indorse this evil practice, from Ogden city government. Specifically I am refering to Godfrey, Sasten and Stevenson, none of whom think there is anything wrong with this immoral practice.
Bonnie Lee - I am well aware of what the Supreme Court decision did - the point is it was a cowardly AND absolutely WRONG decision.
Sarge,
Amen brother, amen.
ArmyS:
I concur that the SC decision on eminent domain takings to increase a town's tax base only was incorrect.
But "cowardly"? How so?
It was cowardly because they lacked, as usual, the courage to make the CORRECT decision based on what the Constitution actually says. This sort of "judicial amending" has been going on for a long, long time. Too long!
Is it true that Bishop Stu Reid actually told people in the "BLIGHTED area that they should take the administration's offer for their homes so Wal-Mart could go in, because he had a revelation from God that they should sell???
Is it true that one wag retorted, "how come God didn't tell ME?"
Is it true that Reid is still a member of the LDS Church...IF all that really happened?
Now that's eminent domain.
What do you all think about SB117 (an ED bill). There are many calling for the Gov. to Veto it. There is an article about it on Utah Planners blog
I would expect the regulars here to be very much in favor of this bill. Don't let the government take land for anything other than roads or public buildings.
This bill would make it so that no political subdivision could take land for a trail. So if a deal could not be worked out for the purchase of land for a trail it would not happen even if the people were in favor of it.
Where do you think Reid will start his "door to door" campaign? Hey, maybe in the Reeves Avenue/22nd & Wall area. Ya think?
yeh, why not?
After all we was the Bishop in that area! No kidding, he really was!!
It was a bit of a carpet bag bishopric kinda deal. He was appointed and he tried to use that position to convince the residents there that it was part of God's plan for them to sell their homes cheap so Wal-Mart could build yet another gigantis super duper giant size store.
New comments are not allowed.