By Rudizink
"Elite employees deserve elite paychecks." That, in a nutshell, is the constant mantra of Blessed Boss Godfrey. Well... it's constant, at least, on those occasions Boss G is called upon to defend the elite paychecks and perques of that cadre of top-brass executive fat-cats and do-nothings-in-suits about whom he fawningly refers as his "A" Team.
But when it comes to the employees that most Ogdenites would consider truly "elite," Boss Godfrey's mantra is plainly one far more often honored in the breach than in the observance. By this we refer to our uniformed public safety officers -- our rank-and-file police and firefighters. (You know -- the elite employees Boss Godfrey is screwing over at this very minute. )
Thanks to the Standard-Examiner, Ogden citizens read on Monday the unvarnished grievances of our police officer rank-and-file. Today, for added citizen dyspepsia, we get a similar lowdown on administration shenanigans from our beleaguered firefighters.
This morning's Kevin Hoffman guest editorial not only focuses on Ogden City's ham-handed mishandling of the firefighter salary negotiations, but also harshly illuminates the Machiavellian manner by which the administration allegedly attempted to engineer a firefighter endorsement for its Godfrey/Peterson "welfare-for-the-rich" landgrab. Firefighter Hoffman brings up a now familiar accusation, sticks to his guns, and certainly minces no words. What a pity it is that we'll never be able to put Boss Godfrey and his A-Team pals on a polygraph over this.
And what about our gentle readers? Who wouldn't like to see Boss Godfrey strapped to a lie detector for a couple of hours, and asked a whole series of questions?
Bring your own rubber hoses.
Don't let the cat get your tongues.
© 2005 - 2014 Weber County Forum™ -- All Rights Reserved
77 comments:
The city’s’ priorities should be decided by the majority of its citizens and not people with political agendas. Please contact your representatives today and make your feelings known.
While this statement maybe true the people actually making the priorities are those who have been elected and all of them have political agendas.
arcritic:
Yes, I hate to admit it, but Hizzonah has a point when he says as a rule decisions should be made by elected officials... that's what they were elected to do... and not by public referenda.
Still, on the other hand, he has also said this decision [all the elements of what are known as the "Peterson Proposal" or "Gondola Plan"] may have more of an impact on Ogden's future than anything since the coming of the railroad. One could argue that a decision of such monumental import by his own admission ought not to be handled in the usual way and should be put up for public approval.
I'd probably also add that this matter has clearly, and seriously, divided Ogden. There seems to be no overwhleming public preference visible [so far] for one side or the other. Given seriously divided public opinion on the matter, so far as can be determined, a referendum might be a way to avoid the effects of long-lasting divisions that might result from ramming the plan through in the usual way. With a referendum, however it turns out, pro or con, the winners can say with some justice that what is being done is what the people wanted done.
On the other hand, the Mayor is right that you cannot run a city, a state, or a nation, by constant appeal to referenda. The question is, is this matter serious enough and enough out of the ordinary to justify an extra-ordinary procedure [referendum] to decide it.
I can see reasonable arguments on both sides of that question.
Well! well! Look who is the dumb-ass Republican. I just read the story in the KSL Webb site about what Republican (newly elected to represent the Republicans on the November ballot) Greiner had to say about his own officers. He calls them “Whiney”
That is pretty pathetic when your own Mayor, City Council, and now your boss who was just chosen to advance in the election calls you “whiney”.
How do you expect to have the public’s respect when your own bosses and leaders have no respect for you. And they are right. To do so, after all you people have new 10 million dollar building and you would have thought to learn that 10 years ago when you Public Safety personal try to Pulling this stunt by having a “Collective Bargaining” signed in to Law that would have solved your problems. Now 10 years later here you whiners are here again. Do you think that the Smart Republicans would allow the wording to be of such that they would be legally bound to you second class citizens.
As far as the pay goes, you have no idea of what real danger is.
You need to be a USA solider in the Middle East right now. They have longer hours worst working conditions and less pay than you do, plus they don’t see their families for up to a year or more. Now do you see why you are considered second class citizens. You chose that career and life style. So don’t try to get any sympathy from me.
Stupid Whiney COPS, stupid Firemen, Stupid Democrats.
By the way, the Hoffman op ed piece is a damn fine piece of work. Clear, cogent and well argued.
Curm - You are quite correct - you can not run a city be referandum. HOWever, something of this magnitude, in my opinion, deserves to be looked at in a much different way.
I absolutely agree with that, Curmudgeon. Extremely well argued and to the point.
I do think we should do what he asks and make it known to the City Council that many of us wish them to reopen negotiations and review the process. Resolution #95-9 that Hoffmann refers to is, after all, a Joint Resolution between the Firefighters and Ogden City, and has, Hoffmann states, been in effect for eleven years, and the process agreed upon in it did not happen this year, from what I hear.
Therefore, comments regarding the City only having to abide by agreements for one year--I believe Management Services Director Mark Johnson and Councilman Safsten have made comments like that to the press--are obviously part of the problem.
Have been trying to make sense of the Ogden City Budget. Will throw out some figures from it. The first figure is in the column "2006, adopted," and the second is in "2007, proposed":
Police: 13,137,500: 14,404,150
Fire: 6,630,750: 5,946,150
Mayor: 434,375: 519,700
Management Services: 2,187,075: 3,335,075
I do know that two or three EMTs were moved into another budget category of "Medical Services," but you have to admit, the fire department shows a drop in available assets in "2007, proposed" from the previous year. As they used to say in school, "Compare and contrast."
I have found that during the budget process, the city council can ask for any figures it wishes, and I'm not sure some of our newer council members, especially, knew that. As I've said before, otherwise, impasse is the only method for the firefighters and police to directly address the council, but I believe the council itself could have requested the unions' input during the process. I have heard that they were unaware there was a problem until impasse was reached.
There was so much that went wrong with this process that they really ought to reopen everything and start over.
Dian:
Several points [keeping in mind that you are much more informed about all this, including the process, than I am]:
1. I think the Ogden fiscal year begins 1 July. Is that right? If it is, starting over from scratch may not be possible. Two days from now, we'll be in the new fiscal year covered by the new budget if that's so.
2. The process clearly broke down this time and did not work as it was designed to work. It's a little disturbing to see a coucilman and adminstrative representative retreating to the minimum the regulations may technically permit... i.e. we only have to keep an agreement one year. If that was not the understanding on both sides when the original barganing agreement was made, it's indefensible. An agreement between the city and a union on bargaining procedures sealed by nothing more than a handshake much less a joint resolution should be good for the term agreed on, and if none was set specifically, until a new agreement is made. Part of what seems to be the problem now is, the Firemen and Policemen no longer trust the word of the people they must negotiate with. And if you believe the other party's word is no good, then no negotiating process can work well.
I guess what I'm suggesting is that this whole mess is an example of incompetent management of city affairs under the present administration. Short of a change in personnel, damned if I know how to fix it.
Well, this is Thursday...work meeting night for the Council.
It seems to me that a bold council could and should insist on reopening this can of worms and let's see what wriggles in favor of the real "A Teams".
I was told that some council members don't even know who makes out the budget!!!
How the *&^%$%^ can they possibly endorse anything when they haven't a clue about the numbers, who makes them up, and what the negotiating process is?
What was Bill Cook doing for the council during this ugly 'process'??
Ever diaper a wiggly baby blindfolded? With PINS?
Since the whole process appears tainted and punitive, surely a smart lawyer can wade through this morass and reopen and untangle this mess?
I suggest outside attorneys...not the ones hired by the city!!!
Huzzaha to Kevin Hoffman. Now there's a guy who really is on the 'A Team'!!
Is Patriotic supposed to be funny?
He's right about Griener disrespecting his men...but his closing remarks are not funny nor cogent!
How can he say those awful things? Again.....not amusing.
Flame post removed by adminitrator
The scariest thing about “patriotic” it that (s)he’s serious. I have met people with this type of disposition and they are the real thing. There’re not looking for attention or trying to start a flame war; they just truly believe what they are saying. I know by posting this I’m giving him/her the satisfaction of a response to the infantile comments, but I think “not amused” is right. The remarks are not funny nor do they add anything to the thread and I’m glad to see the administrator has finally put and end to it.
Curmudgeon:
I really don't know all that much about the intricacies of the budget and when you can change it and when you can't. It just seems that they are always changing it, and moving funds here and there. Perhaps there are some parts they can change and some they can't.
But I don't think they have to worry about damaging the process, since in my opinion it has already been damaged enough.
I really think they should try to rectify this somehow as a, dare I say, good faith gesture. In watching the processes of government, it seems to me that very few things are set in stone. If you get in trouble with procedure, it seems to me that there is also a procedure to back out of it and rectify it. Arcritic would no doubt know this--and thanks for the budget info, Arcritic.
And Curmudgeon, thank you for writing the post about the differences between what I write for this blog and what reporters do for papers. They are definitely constrained in ways that I am not-- you said that very well.
The knowledge, skills and abilities required to serve as a line officer, in other words the “job performance loop” of a police officer, is far more complex than that of a politician.
Being a front line police officer is arguably the most complex “job performance loop” in our society.
Politicians must understand that there is an extremely competitive market for qualified police officers. Unqualified persons are plentiful, but history has shown that lowering standards is a recipe for disaster.
It will lead to an increase in crime, an increase in the city’s liability and a downturn in property values and the general economy.
Politicians must understand that, they have to pay competitive wages and benefits, and also support their officers in a civil manner.
The Politician that does understand this! Know people want to stay, and not move out of their cities and counties. Because they are safer. Businesses will be knocking doors open to move in. It’s a win- win situation.
We don’t think we should own a mansion or drive a hummer.
We just want to be able to spend some time; to take our kids to a ball game, hunting, fishing, dinner and show with our spouses every once in a while. We all walk in our front door after a hard day at work, and see our spouse and kids. We thank God we made it today!!
SE Story On Office Space
Since the subject of the Administration's competence [politely so called] in managing the city's affairs has become part of this thread, I think this morning's story in the SE [front page] is worth pointing out. It's a Scott Schwebke piece, and it's pretty interesting. Here's the lede:
OGDEN — Vacancies in some types of Weber County office buildings are at the lowest levels in a decade, a trend officials attribute to economic revitalization occurring in downtown Ogden.
What???? An economic revitalization is underway in downtown Ogden without a gondola there??? Surely there must be some mistake. Surely this cannot be. Downtown Ogden's economy is in crisis and needs an instant transfusion of gondola-juice at once. Everyone knows this. Didn't the SE get the memo?
The story goes on to report that of the three categories of office space in Weber County [classes A, B and C], vacancy rates for the last two have been declining of late. The vacancy rate for class A space however has remained stable. And two new class A office buildings are going up downdown already, in the Junction development. They will significantly increase Class A office space in Ogden.
From this, the story reports, Hizzonah Mayor Godfrey has drawn the following conclusion: that Ogden needs more Class A office space [the only category whose vacancy rate is not declining]. He may ask the Council to reconsider its recent decision not to add two more floors to the office building Boyer is constructing at the Junction, with the city on the hook for $400,000 a year to Boyer until the extra floors are rented out. The Mayor said: "We may go back to the council with more information.”
Started thinking about this. First of all, it means the Mayor's insisting that the Council immediately approve the two new floors about a month ago because Boyer couldn't wait any longer for a decsion was nonsense. That became clear when the Council delayed its decision for two weeks to seek more information, and the Mayor came back at the end of those two weeks still asking for approval of his plan. Clearly, since he now is thinking of going back to the Council again, all the haste and insistance on immediate action was bogus.
Second: during the Council discussion which led to its rejecting, by one vote, the Mayor's extra floors plan, it came out that the Mayor's office did not know the vacancy rate for office space in Weber County. Nevertheless, it demanded immediate action. This seems to be the Godfrey management style: demand action before the information needed to make a sound decision is available. We are seeing it again with his welfare for the wealthy gondola proposal. Action first, information later.
Given the increasing evidence of just how stumble-footed this administration has been managing the city's affairs, it is hardly surprising that it bungled the police and firemen's contract negotiations. Given the record so far, the astonishing thing would have been if it had not bungled them.
Demanding decsions be made without the knowledge available to make them wisely; demanding action first, information later; keeping the Council only marginally informed on key matters until the final moments before demanding action. It's the Godfrey style. And it's not only the police and firemen who are paying the price for the Godfrey style, though they are paying, and heavily. It's all of us.
Patriotic is anything but patriotic! I would say to him, "YOU ARE THE STUPID ONE WITH A HORRIBLE ATTITUDE!" My vote is to ship patriotic off to Jakarta and let him live there for a year. If he survives, maybe he will appreciate the fact that he can walk down almost any street in Ogden and feel safe, that he won't be mugged, beaten and killed. We all owe the quality of life that we enjoy, in part, to the police officers who enforece the laws and keep the majority of criminals off the street so we can enjoy the freedoms that our soldiers are fighting for.
I would suggest that everyone take the "Citizens Academy" training. You are trained somewhat as police officers and deputy sheriffs are, but not nearly as intensive. You have the chance to pretend you are a police/deputy sheriff stopping someone who has only one tail light working, but you never know when you ask that person to step out of the car if he/she will cooperate or pull a gun on you. You don't know what kind of a situation you are responding to when you answer a domestic call for "help." The one who called can turn on you and do you injury. These men and women who are our police officers do not have an ordinary job, yet the administration and council treat them that way in negotiations, saying, "Oh, you can't treat one group of employees differently than another." For hell sakes, why not?! Their jobs are as different as night and day!!
I understand because of the low pay that Ogden police officers receive and the recent negotiations, that 4 of them have found employment with nearby cities who pay better wages and where they are respected. Is that smart business procedures? Train your specialized employees and then not pay them adequate wages so they take their newly acquired skills to another city? Are the administration and council sitting on their brains? It seems that they may be deficient in the "smarts" area. And as far as respect goes -- employees will put up with a lot when they feel that they are respected and needed, but the way the administration, council and patriotic have treated them, I don't see much incentive to stay and put up with the abuse.
Dian, you are absolutely right when you said, "But I don't think they have to worry about damaging the process, since in my opinion it has already been damaged enough." The City apparently has a process that doesn't work -- they don't have anything to lose if they corrected the error they made in this year's agreement with the police and fire, but they sure have a lot to gain! My advice to them is: You reopen the budget in all areas and categories and make adjustments throughout the year, readdress that stupid ordinance that you passed, and make the pay agreement even and fair for ALL employees. Did anyone of you check with UAGE to see how they would feel if the council changed the police and fire merit pay scale to the same as what they have? The council needs to trust the groups with which they are negotiating and NOT the administration! Deal with them fairly and they will be more willing to work with you next year. As it stands right now, why should they even try to work with you?! You betrayed them! You betrayed their trust in you! I think that the Council has lost so much in this year's negotiations by letting the administration manipulate you and voting the way you did, that you don't have anything more to lose!
My challenge to the council is: Find out for yourselves whether you're being lied to when you're told that it's too late to change the negotiations. Ask to see the law that puts a deadline on everything! Really, the budget would not be affected by doing away with that punitive sliding scale for the police and fire! That amount to pay the 5% merit pay is already in the budget -- it's a matter of changing the ordinance which the council has the authority to do! JUST DO THE RIGHT THING FOR ONCE!!
It was very disappointing to read what Chief Greiner said about his troops. Seems incredibly arrogant to me.
This fellow doesn't appear to me to be cut out for a leadership role, especially one so important to society as Chief of Police in a town with Ogden's demographics.
These noble public safety servants are highly trained, highly qualified, and proud adult women and men.
They are not 17 year old raw recruits that you can mold into a cohesive unit with intimidation and demeaning abusive behavior.
They especially are not the king's revenue agents.
How in the world could any decent rational leader think that he would inspire the respect and admiration of his warriors by these insults? You cannot effectively lead in the civilian police world without willing capable followers that respect you. You cannot give the citizens the protection they pay for with their tax dollars without effective leadership.
The people of Ogden deserve better.
These are the meanest streets in Utah, and our finest men and women in blue deserve an honorable and capable leader, not one who would betray them to their antagonist who uses disingenuous tactics agains them.
That's my humble opinion and I'm stickin with it until some one with integrity can show me I'm wrong.
It should be obvious that the budget can be opened at any time and adjusted, it does require a public hearing with advance notice published in the paper (can remember if it is 7 or 14 days prior for a budget hearing). In dealing with personnel pay and benefits there may be some reluctance to open the budget to make modifications, especially when there has be some degree of collective barganing. But it can be done. Of course if you do open up the budget and make a change to the amount you expect to spend on employee pay or benefits you will need to either adjust revenue in some manner to cover it or reduce expenditures somewhere else.
Though I am not really sure how they budgeted for the pay increases. If pay increases are dependent on the score on an employee evaluation do you budget for the maximum or some expected value less than that. So there might be enough money in the budget to cover the raises if the council were to change just the method of determining the raises.
There are ways to move money around within a departments budget without reopening it.
Personally, I think that this issue is probably more political than budgetary. And when I say political I think it is political from the administration rather than the council. I think the council has allowed itself to be blamed (fairly or not) for rubberstamping a political move by the administration.
And from my reading I thought that initially all employees were going to get the sliding scale that the police and firefighters got but that at some point the other employees negotiated that to the 3 or higher all or nothing but that the police and firefighters didn't. I could be mistaken on that though.
Arcritic:
Thanks for the info on what is required to reopen budget matters, required notice, etc.
You raise an interesting question regarding budgeting with respect to merit raises when it's unclear how many will earn what level of merit pay. Do they budget I wonder at some estimated percentage of the maximum possible? Is there a budgetary reserve built in to cover more merit pay being earned than anticipated? Probably cities have some established means of dealing with this. Just curious how.
Your take on the political nature of the current contract is interesting, and I suspect correct. And it goes directly to the question others have raised, the union members and Dian for example: what exactly is the Council's proper role in doing the budget? Does it only come in at the end or does it, should it, have a significant role to play earlier along? In negotions with the city unions for example?
Complex job, running cities. Especially when budgeting is a zero sum game, mostly. If one slice of the budget pie gets bigger, another one necessarily gets smaller.
I hope the Council can find a way to do something. Whether a majority on it has the political cojones, and the budgetary expertise, to make it happen is another matter.
Thanks again for the informative [and chewy] post.
Now, you will see what true patriotism is: So gather around you fellow officers.
Because I will teach you what the older officers failed to teach you many years ago.
Each and every Benefit association of both fire and police should have as their moto hanging on walls in their line of work and in their place where they hold their Association meeting this moto.
“I WILL NEVER BETRAY A FELLOW OFFICER IN NEED”.
Whether you realize it or not, your Chief of Police Jon Greiner Betray everyone of you because you are in need and it was not of a selfish need, but a real need.
He should have had the integrity to tell the Mayor. “Please Do Not Ask Me to Betray My fellow Officers”.
Sheriff Brad Slater should have called the Mayor and Ogden City Council and told them.
“I Will Not Betray My Fellow Officers.” .“Do not ask me to cross the picket line!!! What you people are doing is wrong dead wrong and you know it”!!!! “Where is your integrity?????”
This is an issue of Honor and Respect for their fellow officer’s.
These two men are first and formost an officer of the law, They Took and swore a Oath of Office then secondly a politician not the other way around. They both need some guilt trips right now since it is an election for both......
This is what dignity is:
If he is the Police Chief of WHINEY officer it is because of his leadership (or lack of it) that his officers are WHINEY.
What is worst was your fellow officers in Roy and in the county and other cities also betrayed you as well. This is why Ogden City won the negotiations. This is why you are Stupid.
I will continue to teach you if you want to become smart in this game for the brotherhood sake......
Curm, I'll try to answer some of your questions: "You raise an interesting question regarding budgeting with respect to merit raises when it's unclear how many will earn what level of merit pay. Do they budget I wonder at some estimated percentage of the maximum possible? Is there a budgetary reserve built in to cover more merit pay being earned than anticipated? Probably cities have some established means of dealing with this. Just curious how."
Employees have their performance appraisals yearly on their anniversary date, and that is when their merit pay is effective. The City has records and averages of how many employees earn what percentage on their merit pay raises. So the original budget determines the estimated amount needed for salaries. Since the merit increases are spread throughout the year, the full amount usually is not figured into the budget that begins July 1, but is pro-rated on a monthly basis.
"Your take on the political nature of the current contract is interesting, and I suspect correct. And it goes directly to the question others have raised, the union members and Dian for example: what exactly is the Council's proper role in doing the budget? Does it only come in at the end or does it, should it, have a significant role to play earlier along? In negotions with the city unions for example?"
Apparently the Council's role is considered to be a minor role in the budget process. To illustrate, Bill Cook provides an annual luncheon for those who work on the budget -- namely the Council Staff and Administration --the Council is not invited to this luncheon. (I wonder if the cost of the luncheon comes out of his expense account or out of the Council budget?) The Mayor meets with the Department heads, tells them how much they have in their budgets, and tells them to work out the details so that their budget is within those guidelines. The different Departments then take about four months to hammer out their budget. Starting the first work meeting in April, Department Heads start presenting their budgets to the Council. The Council is asked if they have any questions. The questions that are asked never seem to affect the budget, so that department has its budget. Meanwhile the administration begins negotiations with the different groups of employees. The Council is supposedly informed of what is presented to the employees and what their counter offers are. This goes on throughout April and May until all departments have made their presentations and the employee groups have come to an agreement or gone to impasse. Some of those work sessions go to shortly after 11:00 PM, and work sessions are added to the so that the budget is completed on time. As you can see the way things are set up, probably by Ordinances, the Council has very little input to the budget process -- fulfilling the puppet role that council staff and administration have deveoped for them to fool them and the public into thinking that they control things in the City through the budget process.
In order to change things, the way I see it, the council has two obvious choices: Option 1. Assert themselves and demand that their rightful powers be returned to them. It will be difficult, because Bill Cook, the Executive Director, will most likely balk at this because it will mean modifyingrewriting or writing new ordinances in a cooperative effort with administration who will most likely resist any changes.
Option 2. Initiate a proposal to return to the Council/City Manager type of government. Or Option 3, they can go along in the same rut, being completely unproductive puppets --helping no one but Godfrey control the City.
Some of you may think this a rather cynical view of Ogden City government, but after watching it work closely for a year and as an interested observer for a number of years, this is my take on the politics of Ogden. And whoever said that the negotiations with the fire and police were a political manuever by the administration really hit the nail square on the head.
What do the citizens of Ogden want? You have Option 1, Option 2 or Option 3, listed above.
Here is some more ammo. People have “GREEDY POLITICIAN”. What is more greedy than a Chief of Police that is not only collecting his salary, but also collecting his pension at the same time without having to retire. This is called “Double Dipping.”
So here is the real question! What is his actual income amount that he is collecting from the taxpayers of Ogden and Utah combined?
Now if that isn’t enough. He wants to take on a part time job with the state of Utah as a Senator. Is he going to resign from Ogden? He can’t retire at this point because he already officially retired.
The reason why you would want to ask this question is because as the Chief of Police you are on a Salary. It means that you are to be at the citizens beck-and-calling 24/7/365 . Which also means “married to the job”.
Plus the part of the reason for the high salary is to keep him from looking for another job.
So he now will collect three different paychecks from the taxpayers of Ogden & Utah.
Is this not greed and it looks like he not that dedicated to the taxpayers of Ogden.
Can you image that the president of United States also going to run for US senator?
You can very well argue that this is a conflict of interest.
So the word is greedy, not that dedicated as a salary Administrator.
WHOOA!! WHAT A CHANGE!! What brought you back from the dark side, patriotic? You had a good post.
Good, Patriotic! OldTimer: I opt for # 3 option.
Am sure # 1 will be an uphill battle with this administration AND Bill Cook!
Mayor/City Mgr gov't has been broached here before without much comment. I say let's look into it, and float it with the voters.
Town meetings would be an avenue to get the discussion going.
For a successful mayor/city mgr gov't, look to Layton.
Just reread some old posts.
Greiner or Reid??? Caught between a rock and a hard place for sure.
I won't vote for either of these patsys. Either way, Godfrey wins.
What a conniving little jerk.
Greiner is so abusive and arrogant. What were the (few) voters thinking?
We lost a true public servant and very smart classy guy when Dave Thomas lost this election.
Godfrey knows nothing about class. He's all about manipulation and wheeling and dealing.
So, he's covered in the Senate either way with Reid or Greiner.
It's enough to make one a, gasp, democrat!
Don't get all giggly, Curm....it's just a phase.
Is it true that 4 cops are leaving the Ogden force? No more 'blue flu'...more like that 'blue streak', as more and more cops zoom outta Ogden!
Council....what will you do to rectify this travesty????
Good stuff, Patriotic and Old Timer!
You two make one helluva tag team!
Query: What's it gonna take to wake up the council to the fact that BILL COOK IS NOT THEIR FRIEND, but rather BOSS GODFREY'S GUY, whose job it is to KEEP THEM IN THE DARK?
We already know cattle prods don't work.
We already tried that.
Old Timer:
Thanks for the tutorial on the budget process. Interesting that none of it "surfaces" into the public's view [public meaning in this case, me] until the very final stages, as happened this year.
I can see one other possibility for change. Seems to me that since the Council does have final budget approval --- which appears to be it's major role in all this --- a council so-inclined could amend the budget presented to it signficantly. They'd be coming in as late-inning relievers, but could exercise some real authority that way. If a majority was so inclined.
As for returning to the City Manager form of government: I am starting to hear it talked about around town more often of late. [Via shameless eavesdropping at coffee shoppes and such like.] Whether it amounts to more than coffee shoppe chatter, I don't know.
The downside is, under the city manager plan, all power is in the hands of the Council, which hires [and fires] the professional city manager. No independent check on them such as exists [in theory] under a mayor/council system. I agree, that the previous Council didn't provide much of a check on the Mayor's office. I think the jury is still out on the present one. It's shown some grit a couple of times. [Ernest, the two exrta floors proposal]. By the end of the year, we should have a pretty good idea.
Thanks again for laying out the long budget process. Helps explain a few things I did not understand.
Great Post Old Timer. You also hit the nail on the head when you describe the budget process as far as how councils get involved.
As for complaining about Griner having a government job and wanting a part-time job as a State Senator, remember that Dave Thomas is also on the public teate as a deputy county attorney for Summit County. I would bet he is a salaried person as well. He may not have retired in place to to the double dip, it would be interesting to find out how he is compensated by the county while working as a lawmaker. Speaker Curtis was also in that boat when working for Salt Lake County. Our very own Brad Dee is also a government worker that is a law maker. So other than the retirement in place, which I will agree has problems, Griner isn't all that different.
Sad thing is
Griener + Lindquist = Money
He doesn't need it, so he bad mouths the ones that do - his underlings, the street cops for having the blue flu.
Rudi...
But have you tried the ol' nippers?
But then I spose you have to have something to nip, eh?
Old Timer:
I MEANT that I opt for option 2#!!!
What really needs to happen is that the Citizens need to contact the Council and let them know that they have made a huge mistake, they have been hood-winked by the deceitful revengeful Godfrey bunch of liars, they need to ask questions of the employees that their recent decision has effected. Please call the council members and tell them to re-think their decision, we know that the council was fed a line of crap by Matt's minions, and that they are flooded with last minute mis-information.
The Citizens need to know the type of dealings that the Mayor and his henchmen are doing. He is truly a divide and conquer type of person.
He has divided this community so many times that it is pathetic, then he strong arms the council into believing that he has the answer to the situations at hand.
It's time to call Bull-Shit.
Really pissed, you are so right when you say:
"He has divided this community so many times that it is pathetic, then he strong arms the council into believing that he has the answer to the situations at hand."
Not only has he divided the community, but he managed to divide the new Council members through his private, secret meetings! They used to vote pretty much the same, but then the Mayor got Glasmann alone and has either threatened him or offered him a part of the real estate windfall when things start to happen in Ogden. Now Glasmann has been working on Stephens. It seems that Jeske is the only "Untouchable" of those new Council members that we placed our hopes on for a change from the "rubber stampers" that they replaced on the Council. So he has effectively split the Council so that he has the majority of votes -- 4 - 3. How disappointing it is for those of us who compaigned hard for these three new candidates to get them elected, and in less than a year, the Mayor was able to get to two of them! He's good at his game!
I think the citizens should call "Foul!" The Mayor and City Council should sign statements declaring that they do or do not have a conflict of interest with the many facets of the Peterson proposal. The Mayor has gone beyond all reasonable limits in promoting the gondola and Chris Peterson's business venture. He crossed the line of propriety when he used the City newsletter that is enclosed with the utility bill, and when he had the City's GIS department develop the maps for Chris Peterson's presentation. Is the reason that it is taking so long to gather the information on how many tax dollars have been spent promoting a private developer's project due to the fact that there are a lot of documents that have to be changed before they can be made public?
Real Dave....Yes..definitely documents should be signed that state there is no conflict of interest with Godfrey and gang...including any and all council members.
I met one of Godfrey's relatives, a few DNA lines removed, who said she asked Godfrey at a dog and pony show if he was willing to sign such a doument that he stands to gain nothing personal from Peterson's land grab and scheming. He refused, of course. "Relative' said Godfey looked very dismayed at this public 'betrayal'.
"Relative" stated...'you can choose your friends, but unfortunately, you can't choose
your family'.
Wonder how the closer relatives are veiwing their prodigy...??
Another news story, this one in the SL Trib, on police claiming number of tickets will double in Ogden now:
Ogden police warn of raised ticket quota
Here's the opening:
By Cathy McKitrick
The Salt Lake Tribune
Some rank-and-file Ogden police officers suspect the focus of their jobs could soon shift - from fighting crime to writing tickets.
And they believe that shift is spurred by the city's new justice court that opens Monday.
"We see a direct link between the two," said Sgt. Troy Arrowsmith, president of the Ogden Police Benefits Association. "Our sliding performance scale means we write more citations, which means the justice court brings in more revenues to fund itself and other things in the city."
Here's a two year-old City Weekly Article which goes into how the justice court/citation quota racket works in practice:
And Justice for All
I had a long conversation yesterday with Mike Martinez, the Salt Lake Attorney who is profiled in the article. Although the Utah Supreme Court ruled against him in the last case, holding that the establishment of Justice Courts is within legislative discretion, this setback only means that the justice court scam is technically legal -- which certainly doesn't make it right. Mike assures me that there are justice courts all over Salt Lake Valley, raking in millions of dollars.
Moreover, attorney Martinez already has another case working its way through the judicial system, founded on other legal grounds, which he expects to wind up in the Supreme Court.
It's nice to know that there are still a few attornies out there who are willing to fight for what's right.
And it's a shame, I think, that we have a local government which thinks it's quite alright to mercilessly plunder its own citizenry.
Regarding disclosure statements--I have been saying that we need them for a long time. Title 10 of the Utah Code is the section of Utah law governing municipalities, and it states that if elected officers have any interest at all in businesses dealing with municipalities, they must disclose.
To my knowledge, few have signed disclosure forms. Lack of signing them to me means in this instance that those who have not signed them are stating, by default, that they have no personal interest in any projects the city is doing.
I think everyone should sign a disclosure form that states yes or no on every project and this should be filed, instead of just stating that no one has to do it until they have an interest. Anyway, here are the titles and chapters of Utah law dealing with this:
10-3-1306. Interest in business entity regulated by municipality -- Disclosure statement required.
(1) Every appointed or elected officer or municipal employee who is an officer, director, agent, or employee or the owner of a substantial interest in any business entity which is subject to the regulation of the municipality in which he is an elected or appointed officer or municipal employee shall disclose the position held and the nature and value of his interest upon first becoming appointed, elected, or employed by the municipality, and again at any time thereafter if the elected or appointed officer's or municipal employee's position in the business entity has changed significantly or if the value of his interest in the entity has increased significantly since the last disclosure.
(2) The disclosure shall be made in a sworn statement filed with the mayor. The mayor shall report the substance of all such disclosure statements to the members of the governing body, or may provide to the members of the governing body copies of the disclosure statement within 30 days after the statement is received by him...
10-3-1307. Interest in business entity doing business with municipality -- Disclosure.
(1) Every appointed or elected officer or municipal employee who is an officer, director, agent, employee, or owner of a substantial interest in any business entity which does or anticipates doing business with the municipality in which he is an appointed or elected officer or municipal employee, shall publicly disclose to the members of the body of which he is a member or by which he is employed immediately prior to any discussion by such body concerning matters relating to such business entity, the nature of his interest in that business entity...
10-3-1308. Investment creating conflict of interest with duties -- Disclosure.
Any personal interest or investment by a municipal employee or by any elected or appointed official of a municipality which creates a conflict between the employee's or official's personal interests and his public duties shall be disclosed in open meeting to the members of the body in the manner required by Section 10-3-1306.
Utah Code
Rudi:
Thanks for the link to the CW article. I had not seen it, and [coming from out of state four years ago], I was really not quite sure what a "justice court" was, how it was constituted, etc. I remember thinking first time I heard the term, "that's odd. Aren't all courts supposed to be justice courts? "
Now, thanks to your posting that link, I know what they are, and having judges beholden to mayors for their jobs does indeed create, at the very least, a problem of public perception if nothing else. On both policy and constitutional grounds, the challenge to the JCs seem sound to me.
But, on the other hand, I'm not sure I agree with the complaining about the JCs as profit centers. Provided the tickets being written are valid [i.e. are written with good cause], I have no problem with those who receive them swelling the public coffers by their fines. Every week I see folks running red lights, and stop signs, and speeding through school zones when kids are out and about and I wounldn't mind in the least if they had to shell out a few bucks to get their attention.
So, the simple fact that the courts raise more than they cost to operate does not on its face seem to be a problem to me. [That the judges' pay depends on the fines they assess is a problem.]
Take the example in the article, the guy pulled over when a cruising policeman ran his plates and came up with a no insurance notice. Well, the guy had no insurance. The law says he has to have it. The ticket does not seem unreasonable or unfair to me. [Though six bills is a whopping fine.]
Nor do I think it unreasonable that the police might be more active looking for insurance violations in West Valley than say on the Avenues, so long as it can be shown statistically [and I bet it can] that insurance violantions are substantially more likely to happen in one location than the other. Police patrol more frequently in high crime areas than in low crime ones, which makes good sense to me.
So, a question: if the justice courts were moved out of the executive branch, and judges' pay was not linked to fines collected, and their perfromance was reviewed as other judges' performance is reviewed, would you still object to the creation of a JC in Ogden? And if so, why? [E.g. I've seen so far no discussion of the ostensible reason for creating them, which is to free up court time for the regular courts to handle serious crimes instead of traffic violations, etc.]
Let's see....we have this Rudizink stating that Bill Cook is not the council's friend. Wonder how he comes to that conclussion. My sources, and they are pretty good sources, say different, but Rudi KNOWS BETTER, HUH?!?
And then there's Sharon who claims she was "told" that some members of the council doesn't even know who makes out eh Budget. I guess we should just believe that one, too. Maybe there's a member who sleeps through it, or something, that might be a bit vague on this, but really.
As for reopening the Budget....uh, uh, uh....State Law, Sharon. It's adopted and done for this year, so relax and read up on some of this stuff and don't get in such a lather over "something you've been told." Gawd-a-mighty, girl.
Some much bitchin from those who know so little. Makes me wonder how they keep from going under.
Fly:
You overlook the fact that money already in the budget as discretionary funds of various agencies can be moved around or used for contingent purposes not specifically addressed in the budget.
I will give you an example. Some years ago, Hizzonah Mayor Godfrey asked the city council to approve purchase of an expensive set of rollaway bleacher seats for the downtown amphitheater. The Council said no, that given the then-current financial state of the city, buying the bleachers would not be a wise use of city funds. Hizzonah went ahead and bought them anyway out of his office's discretionary funds.
So it seems there is at least some money in the budget, especially at the start of the fiscal year, that is unallocated. How much, I don't know. Enough to make a difference in the firemen/police matters, [by, for example, increasing the one-time bonus from 2% to 3% maybe?],I don't know. But it's clearly not on its face silly to suggest that possibility there is unallocated money in the budget that might be directed towards new ends, even after the start of the fiscal year.
"Some much bitchin from those who know so little."
So edumacate us, fly-on-the-wall.
Please cite the state statute or case that you say inexorably shuts down the budget process at some fixed point.
This site is designed for a focused discussion of issues. So please provide us something tangible to chew on.
Unless and until you or someone else can point us in the direction of some operative legal authority that inexorably closes the door on Utah municipal budget amendments, most of us will continue to rely on the general American rule, (of which this Iowa rule is typical) that budgets can be amended to meet unsforeeen developments by a sitting legislative body at any time during the fiscal year.
As for your pal Bill Cook, we all know he's philosophically conflict averse, at the very least. He's the admitted author of the present Ogden Council, "management model" for instance, which in my view, has been instrumental during his tenure in ceding important legislatively-granted Ogden City Council powers to the administrative branch (such as the power to approve property sales,) which has resulted in diminishing the council's effectiveness against the aggressiveness of the current administration. At this point in Ogden history, it would seem that Bill Cook is not a good fit to serve as Council Director, (even though we concede he's a very nice man who works very hard at his job.)
The current council is being effectively man-handled by the administration, for the most part, and Mr. Cook, who's somehow morphed the role of city council office director into council mentor and guru, has made no apparent effort to steer the council toward assuming its proper role, and becoming an effective check or balance against an administration that's clearly run amuk.
We await your statute-cite with abated breath.
Thanks for making a good point, Curmudgeon.
The extra money may in fact be already in the budget, as we understand it.
Discussion of budget amendments thus becomes a possible side-issue, and the Primary ISSUE then becomes whether reasonable criteria have been adopted to permit policemen and firefighters to tap the money that's been made available, at least.
Forgive Rudi for delving into what's may indeed be a complete non-issue. Your humble blogmeister has a little idle time on his hands this afternoon however, and he could not resist the temptation to box fly-on-the-wall's ears.
;-)
did I understand this issue correctly?
The Justice Court Judge and the policemen are paid from the revenues generated by the tickets written....bail forfeitures, etc?
WELL! THAT is an incentive to write as many traffic violation tickets as possible!
I agree with Atty Mike Martinez' stance that having the Justice Court Judge appointed and dancing to the tune of the mayor is not a good idea.
That may work in other cities with a benevolent mayor, but surely not in this town.
Besides, where is the separation of powers?
Thanks, Rudi, for jumping in. It would appear this this council needs to get on its collective hind legs and read the municipal code and learn just what their authority is!
Yes..fly, I've also been told that some, if not all, of the CC members were not fully apprised on the budgetary process, their role and WHO compiled it.
Knowing how this mayor works as someone stated...always in a 'do it right now'...mode; it is easy to see how the CC can be manipulated and bullied into decisions that do not serve the public.
Bill Cook, in my opinion (and the opinion of several others?) needs to be replaced. I understand the CC can fire him and hire someone who actually is on their side!
Without interacting with Bill Cook and the Council, and not being present at the Work Sessions and OTHER meetings, I'm at a loss as to how everyone is an expert on Bill Cook and as to why Cook's actions are a reason to replace him as Executive Director of the Council. Me thinks thou doth assume WAY TOO MUCH.
As for your much anticipated awaiting "the statue-cite with abated breath," here ya go:
"On or before the first scheduled town council meeting in May, the Mayor submits a tnetative Budget to the Town or City Council.The tentative budget must contain some required elements and must be submitted on the formsa approved by the office of the state auditor. After the tentative budget is presented to the council, the ocuncil adopts it as the tentative budget of the town (city) and then begins to make its own by modifying and or amending it. This process can take place at one or more meetings including special meetings called for that purpose. The tnetative budget is a public document as soon as its presented to the council. At the meeting, when the tentative bdget is adopted, the council MUST set a time and place for a Public Hearing on the budget. Notice shall be posted at least 48 hours prior to this meeting and should give the date, time, and place of the Public Hearing.
"At the Public Hearing ANY person interested must be allowed to speak on the budget. After the Public Hearing, the council must adopt the budget and set the property tax rate, the maximum being .007 per dollar of taxable value of taxable property. The budget and tax rate can be adopted at the same meeting as the Public Hearing, or at a later meeting, but should be done BEFORE June 22 of the year. If the city does not intent to increase property taxes, the tax rate is set on or before June 22. If the town is increasing property taxes, the taxes and budget MUST BE ADOPTED BEFORE August 17."
To continue:
Councils cannot make any appropriations out of any funds in EXCESS of the estimated expendable revenue for the Budget Year of the fund. A ciuncil may reduce or transfer any encumbered or unexpended balance from one department IN A FUND from one department to another IN THE SAME FUND as long as there is no reduction in requirement debt retirement of other appropriation required by law."
All of this can be found in Utah Code 10-5-114, 106,115,123,125 51-7-1 et seq, 128, 1--5-10 116, 118.
Yep, plenty of State Law to go around and control the budget process. And one could call the Utah State Auditor's Office for more info on how and when a budget get adopted, inlucing departments, funds, and Enterprise Funds.
So much for Rudi boxing ANYONE'S ears. Duh!
Uh, one other thing for all of you attorneys, "the key to a successful budget is complying with its State rules and regulations and the budget's goals and limitations. The State Law is found, Rudi, in the "Uniform Fiscal Procedures Act for Cities (184).
And Curm, "transfers between budgets for city departments can only be made by the governing body of the city. This should be done by Resolution of the Council."
I guess this is one of those "ya'll had to have been there to understand the ramifications of the budget process." The council members were told, by Bill Cook and others, about the budget process. Whether they each grasped it or not is another story.
Fly:
You wrote: And Curm, "transfers between budgets for city departments can only be made by the governing body of the city. This should be done by Resolution of the Council."
Does this mean the council, can by resolution, transfer funds from one portion of the approved budget to another? If that's what it does mean, it seems that the council could, by resolution, reallocate funds in the new budget that goes into effect today if it wished to, by resolution. Is that right?
Not an attorney, Fly. Trying to understand the meaning of the text you quoted. That seems to be what it says. Que no?
Fly: "So much for Rudi boxing ANYONE'S ears. Duh!"
Hmmm... The Title 10 Chapter 5 sections fly has cited pertain apply to Utah Towns, NOT cities. Ogden is a Class 2 City. So fly didn't get off to a very good start. Wrong Chapter in other words.
OK, so lets turn to the CORRECT CHAPTER -- applicable statutory sections dealing with Utah Cities (Title 10, Chapter Six - Uniform Procedures Act)
And what do we find there? Oh My!
"10-6-119 Budgets in effect for budget period - Amendment - Filing for public inspection.
Upon final adoption, the budgets shall be in effect for the budget period, subject to later amendment. A certified copy of the adopted budgets shall be filed in the office of the city auditor blah, blah blah..."
and then this:
"0-6-132 Loans by one fund to another - Acquiring bonds for investment.
Subject to restrictions imposed by bond ordinance, statute or other controlling regulations, the governing body of a city may (1) authorize interfund loans from one fund to another at such interest rates and upon such repayment terms and conditions as it may prescribe, and (2) with available cash in any fund, purchase or otherwise acquire for investment unmatured bonds of the city or of any fund of the city, etc...
Incidentally, Chapter 5 (remember this only deals with towns)contains this provision, which is similar to section 10-6-119 above:
"10-5-110. Budgets effective for year -- Amendment -- Public access.
On final adoption, each budget shall be in effect for the budget year, subject to later amendment....."
Even if the language in the WRONG CHAPTER he cited had been applicable, he obviously failed to read the paragraph that completely undermined his argument.
Fly thus scores a zero in legal research.
"Duh" is right, eh fly?
How embarrassed fly must feel now.
I suppose this is just another legal tidbit his good buddy Bill Cook "forgot" to tell him about.
Mebbe he's been attending TOO MANY council meetings and work sessions. They do tend to make your eyes glaze over.
Thanks for playing, fly.
Please accept your consolation-prize as you exit stage left!
Next!!!!
"Not an attorney, Fly. "
Neither is fly, obviously.
Hopefully he's not a city council member either.
That's my thought,Curm....think it's been done before. Not being an attorney either, I can't really form an opinion, but as I've stted, I believe it has been done. Also, there are also those pesky little "budget openings" that allow for certain dollars that come in after adoption. Openings are always follwed by what might be called "like amount" expenditures, so the "openings" are not "open ended," if you get my drift.
Terribly complex, this budget process, but much of it is administered and controled by State Law, such as adoption deadline.
Guess my point is that there's both the Law and seven council members, all of which play a role. I do get a kick out of those who say, "I heard this" or "I heard that," and they then take that as being factual. Couldn't be further from the truth. Nor could all this negative portaying of Bill Cook, especially by people who just don't have a personal frame of reference.
I think fly and Bill Cook should rent a room.
Curmudgeon: "So, a question: if the justice courts were moved out of the executive branch, and judges' pay was not linked to fines collected, and their perfromance was reviewed as other judges' performance is reviewed, would you still object to the creation of a JC in Ogden?"
My short answer is NO.
My main complaint about justice courts is that they operate under the direction and control of Utah Mayors and County commissions, and not under the direct control of the State Courts system. Justice Court "judges" are thus directly beholden to local administrations for their livelihood. This is not a good thing, I would suggest, in circumstances wherein greedy and prodigal local government executives are fixated on raising maximum revenues. As Justice Court Kwan said in our earlier-cited City Weekly article:
[Mayor] Auger’s sway over his career "certainly doesn’t lend itself to judicial independence. It certainly makes you look over your shoulder."
Municipal courts are common in most states, and I believe it's entirely appropriate to have a "lower tier" of courts, to adjudicate the relatively minor offenses.
California, for example has Municipal Courts for the disposition of all misdemeanor matters, and Superior Courts to handle the felonies.
These courts all operate under the direction and control of the State Courts apparatus, and are thus not susceptible to the criticism that they are run by the same government entity that funds and operates municipal or county police agencies.
The temptation for corruption is great, I believe, when both the courts and police agencies operate out of the same shop. The current OPD pay brouhaha is a prime example of this. In the instant case, our limited police resources are now being diverted from the mission of true law enforcement, to a system with a primary object of raising revenue. This is unfair both to our law enforcement professionals, and to the general public.
Bottom line, Rudi, Althepal, whoever, the Budget is controlled by State Law, not your whims. Legal research is not my thing, obviously, that I'll leave to the shisters, er, lawyers. But look closer and you'll NOT find much difference between "cities" and "towns," and is not expresley prohibited by State and or Federal Law. Also, AL-THE-ZINC, a closer look will bring to bare nearly the same scenario for cities (1st-5th Class) as Townes, so don't get your panties in a knot over your legal research being so friggin profound. Just about the same stuff in either cities or towns (dates, raising property taxes, etc.), which goes to my premise that it is all mostly dictated by State Law, Rules and Regulations (The Uniform Fiscal Procedures Act for Cities-184....the same place that the Rules & Regs for Townes are found). Little if ANY difference, pal.
So here's a big old DOUBLE DUH, AL-THE-ZINC! You could stand to take a refresher course in budgetary law, it appears.
The ticket increase, Ozboy, is about 4%-5% of the action. In otherwords, approximately 95%-96% of the PEP are issues, duties, and responsibilities NOT related to giving out EXTRA traffic tickets. But keep your seat belts buckled and support those in uniform.
Please feel free to drop by to publicly embarrass yourself any time you like, Fly.
Our gentle readers always appreciate comedy relief; and we know you crave the attention.
omigawd....do you think fly could possibly be Cook? Or Cook's wife? or gawd forbid..a council member??
Sounds like fly has been attending some work sessions too.
Also appears like someone in the city hall has been doing some "research" for mr/ms fly.
If fly's research is correct...the mayor makes up the budget and then the council gets a peek... that explains why the ff's and the police are screwed over again!
Rudi: [re: municipal courts]
A direct answer to a direct question. Well, that makes one thing certain: you'll probably never hold elective office.
Thanks. Your argument in re: municipal courts [so much better a term than "justice courts" I think] makes sense to me. Separation of powers is not just a phrase with which to torture eleventh graders on a civics exam. It matters. Or should.
Good Mornin', Rudi
Good letters today from Robert Belka on the gondola and our east bench..and Steve Huntsman on WSU.
Either one may make a topic for discussion.
And then...and then...we have this:"A yr ago we had a difficult time getting people out to vote in a local election." (Larry Crouch.)
Where was he last Tuesday?? Up in a gondola all day?
WE had 27 voters show up in a 13 hour period!! Appalling.
Crouch's dear Marisa and Nathan, with whom he has been conversing all their lives about Ogden and whining, ala Greiner and his cops, now have HOPE, and Nathan and Marisa are so happy that 'thousands' of jobs will be here in Ogden that they are now going to make Mr. Crouch even happier and have his grandchildren right here in Ogden!!! And all because of a .....gondola!!!
Wow! That Mayor Godfrey and his developer pal, Peterson, sure know how to populate a city, eh?
For a saner view, I suggest a read of Mr. Belka's thoughtful letter today.
Sharon:
Not voting is as American as apple pie. When Pennsylvania elected a convention to consider [and finally ratify] the US constitution in 1788 --- a fairly important matter one might think --- there were 70,000 eligible voters in the state. 13,000 of them managed to flog themselves to the polls to vote. That's about 18%.
We have a tradition of not
voting that streatches all the way back to the founding.
As for Mr. Martinez's appeal to the SC, he lost. From reading the opinion of the court, it appears that there may be some flaws in the system that the legislature may need to address but Mr. Martinez did a poor job of arguing the case.
In affirming Goodman’s convictions, we are not foreclosing future challenges to the validity of the justice court scheme, and in fact, we encourage the legislature to give
serious consideration to some of the arguments raised in the amicus brief. It is theoretically possible that a justice court judge may be unable to exercise his judicial functions with the necessary impartiality because of pressure to generate revenue for his municipal employer or that a municipal government may exercise such control over its justice court that it violates fundamental principles of separation of powers.50 But to prevail on such claims, a defendant would need to support them with specific evidence51 and cogent legal argument. Here, because of the completely deficient briefing and lack of evidence, we must
affirm Goodman’s convictions.
This morming's Deseret News has an article: "2 shootings and brawl keep Ogden police busy."
Yesterday, we saw on the front page of the Standard Examiner coverage of the apartment fire in Roy, fought by three agencies, including Ogden Firefighters Local 1654.
It's not as if these people, our police and firefighters, aren't earning their money.
There's a lot about the money question that's not making sense. Arcritic was very helpful in bringing up the fact that ongoing budgetary expenses have to be paid with ongoing funds. Yet we read a couple of days ago that the question of the two stories and guarantee of $400,000 a year in leases to the Boyer company might be revisited by the mayor and council.
Which of course makes one think---if we feel comfortable guaranteeing $400,000 a year in leases to the Boyer company, this indicates that we must have that $400,000 in ongoing funds.
Doesn't it?
And earlier in this thread, there is quoted part of the Utah Uniform Fiscal Procedures Act that states that it is possible to loan money from one fund to another within the budget, should this lease fund not be a salary paying fund.
This salary question can be revisited, and I think it should be. The police and firefighters are performing vital services that we ourselves are unable to do. That alone mandates that we pay them well and treat them with respect.
If our council thinks it wise to revisit this question and make the changes necessary to bring the firefighter and police salaries up to the level of a decent wage, believe me, it can be done. In fact, there are very few things in governmental procedure that are impossible to do, it seems---the question is how much effort people are willing to put into them.
Resolving this problem is more than possible. What seems to be getting in the way of resolution is human unwillingness to do so. And that can be changed, too.
We can change that.
The Utah State Constitution states:
Article I, Section 2. [All political power inherent in the people.]
All political power is inherent in the people; and all free governments are founded on their authority for their equal protection and benefit, and they have the right to alter or reform their government as the public welfare may require.
What we have to do is contact our council and tell its members our wishes as pertaining to "the public welfare," regarding ticket quotas, lack of adequate staffing, lack of adequate salaries, high turnover in these departments, etc.
We have been complaining that the council has not been exercising its rights to legislate. We too have rights, and not only rights, but an obligation to change things if they are not working for us. All we have to do is pick up the phone, hit the e-mail button, write a letter, attend a council meeting and make a public comment. It's one thing to point out things that are not working well--it's another to get in there and fix them. We can do it, and I think we should.
2 shootings and brawl keep Ogden police busy.
Utah Constitution
A good Sunday to everyone! Dian, that was good information and a good post. There are some very good posts with a lot of great information on this thread. I have been getting some phone calls and letters, and many emails about the unfairness of the sliding scale that we, the Council, stuck to the firefighters and police. I hope that some adjustment can be made to that ordinance -- I haven't given up hope.
Also, Curm, on voting -- when I was a Den Leader in Cub Scouts, I came across "The American's Creed" and made a plaque for my Cub Scouts to help teach them to be good citizens, and it reads: "I believe in the United States of America as a Government of the people; by the people, for the people; a democracy in a republic; established upon those principles of freedom, equality, justice and humanity for which American patriots sacrificed their lives and fortunes. I, therefore, believe it is my duty to my Country to love it; to support its Constitution; to obey its laws, to respect its flag, and to defend it against all enemies." And I add: It is my responsibility, as well as my right to vote my conscience for whomever I please so that we may continue to have "a Government of the people; by the people, for the people; a democracy in a republic." I wasn't allowed to vote until I was 21, but I have NEVER missed voting in a general election and have voted in most primary elections since then.
Whether you agree with my view on voting or not, this post is a good reminder of why we are celebrating on Tuesday. All of you have a SAFE and FUN 4th of July!!
So, Rudi=the Pal....you challenge me to find where State Law regulates the Budget: I did. Then you challenge me to provide the State Stuatue: I did. And your absolutely WEAK response is to come back for a good laugh and to embarrass myself? Seems like I answered all of your questions and was correct in my assertions.
The LAUGHS on you, PAL, and you're the guy who proclaims himself to be so frigging knowledgable, etc. No wonder I don't spoend much time reading this tripe anyomore. You get more like your opposition everyday....unsupportive and unsubstantiated and just plain gripping.
What a shame, and you used to be a s self proclaimed legend in your own time, yours and no-one else's.
Ms. Jeske:
I haven't missed a vote since I was 21 either. When I was growing up, your first vote was a big thing, a rite [and right, come to think of it] of passage up there with getting a driver's license and registering for the draft [for young men]. It was the last of the big three. The widespread lack of interest in voting among the young today puzzles me partly because I recall what a big deal it was, that first vote, back then.
I'd disagree only partly with your post on voting. I figure someone who decides not to vote... who for example looks over the field of candidates for an office and says "a plague on all their houses" --- has fulfilled his obligations as a citizen every bit as much as someone who pulls a lever for one candidate or another. Good citizenship I think requires that you make a decision about an election... a considered decision, based on what information you can find. That decision can be to vote for a particular candidate, or to vote for none of them if that's what you conclude. Beyond that one caveat, I think we are pretty much on the same ground on this.
Curm, I, too, am at a loss as to why so many young people don't vote. Two years ago, I ran into it with my youngest son and his wife who live in Roy. She said, "I've never voted, because I don't know who to vote for or what I'm voting for." She told me that she wasn't registered to vote, but that my son had registered (he voted when he lived at home). I didn't say too much to them, because being the mother-in-law you don't butt in very often if you want a good relationship, but I think I may have said, "If you don't vote, then you're letting someone else decide for you." BTW, she called a little later to find out where she could register and she did vote.
I guess that is my big thing -- I want to have a say on who is going to represent me, and sometimes, a lot of the time, it's voting for the lesser of two evils, but at least no one else made that choice for me!
I agree people should find out everything they can about the issues and the candidates for which they vote. I know not everyone takes the newspaper and it used to be a little harder to gain information, but now with the internet and everyone can have their own web page, there is no reason not to have the knowledge you should to vote.
The fact that a lot of people don't vote does bother me, and I'm glad that I grew up in the era that we did and I have this strong sense of patriotism for and pride in America.
HAPPY INDEPENDENCE DAY!!
Back for another public caning, eh Fly? You certainly seem to be a glutton for punishment.
As you'll recall, this discussion originated with your unsupported assertion:
Fly: "As for reopening the Budget....uh, uh, uh....State Law, Sharon. It's adopted and done for this year..."
I then asked you a simple question, for which you were able to supply no answer:
Rudi: "Please cite the state statute or case that you say inexorably shuts down the budget process at some fixed point."
You responded with irrelevant gibberish, and offered some statutory citations from Title 10, Chapter 5, a chapter which only applies to Utah towns, and not Utah cities like Ogden. Even then, it was obvious that you hadn't event bothered to read the code sections which you cited, otherwise you would have discovered this.
I then guided you to the correct chapter (Title 10, Chapter Six,) which applies the identical principle to city budgets.
The gist of it: Both city and town budgets are subject to amendment at any time during the budget year under explicit provisions of state law, contrary to your original assertion.
You were wrong. Be man enough to admit it.
If you don't believe me, read the code sections that I've so graciously linked above.
And if your pal Bill Cook hasn't been telling you about this all along, perhaps there may be a problem with Bill Cook.
One thing's for sure though, Fly:
You can no longer plead ignorance -- at least not in connection with the council budget amendment remedy.
And there's absolutely no reason you can't learn a little bit about Utah law on Weber County Forum... at least between temper tantrums. The truth is what we seek here, after all.
Have a nice day, Fly.
Well Rudi, you sure seem to have alot of time on your hands and are going WAY above and beyond. Me, I'm going to light some fireworks because I really don't care about this foolsih debate with you. State Law is in charge as I said.
This is over. Quack!
Oh yeah, so's your "get Cook campaign." Never in a million years, pal.
Gee, Curm...seems like the fly has you targeted now.
He/she started out blasting me!
Thanx for letting me be in your good company!
I was so thrilled when I turned 21 and could vote in a presidential elction two weeks later that I cried.
I recall walking to and from the polls with my husband and how excited I was for the great responsibility and blessing it was , and is, to vote!
Well, I learned today that in the new Superman movie, Superman doesn't say, "Truth, Justice and the American Way!!" He just says 'Truth and Justice'.
Now that is sad. We need MORE American Way..not less. An icon like Superman has had influence on children for decades.
Those people who don't know who is running, what the issues are, or where to register, could, I am certain,tell you when Britney Spears 2nd child is due. What Jolie and Pitt named their 'love' child and where it was born...and when! Who were the contenders on Ameriacan Idol, the new Survivor, and who made it thru that disgusting tripe called, Fear Factor.
Those are the really important issues of the day and sooo easy to read in the Enquirer.
I said 27 people turned up to vote where we were election judges. 27 in a 13 hour period. THAT IS APPALLING!! And disheartening.
I'm with dorrene. I thrill to learn of our Founding Fathers. I'm so grateful for the sacrifices of millions who have preserved our liberty.
I love our flag...the most beautiful ensign in the world! We should fly those colors every day.
Hey Fly. sounds like you bought into the Godfrey Bull Shit. Shame on you. I hope you enjoy the Dark side, cause Matt and John are having thier way with you, and your not even smart enough to know it. Do you feel violated?
Bill Cook is a weasel, you know it, search your feelings Fly, or maybe you prefer a big juicy turd.
Dont try to justify the underhanded actions of the lying vengeful Godfrey bunch, it's time to pull your head out of your ass and wake up to reality, they are using you like a puppet.
I dont know how people like them and you sleep at night.
This was the thread where double dipping was being discussed so I will put this here.
Garwood plans to remain as SO Mayor even if he wins State Rep Seat.
There was a guy from Clinton, IIRC, that served as both a city councilman and as a State Rep.
While I feel there are conflicts for government workers to hold elected office, I think holding 2 elected offices at the same time is an even bigger conflict.
I know I would never vote for someone who was not going to resign one elected office if elected to another.
I wonder....what is it that saome in the council have done that's so gotten to some of you posters on this blog?
To date:No votes on the gondola; the Junction was the work of the previous Council and things are going good down there (building has started and tenants are coming aboard and the Episcopal Church got its property); the Raptors have started their season; the Civil Service Commission is intact and operational throughout the terms of the present Council; The CO2 was tabled for discussion; the Lanldords and property owners now have enough time to recoup their investment from action taken by a previous Council; Ernest is still talking with the City, but after over a year and a half, I wonder where that thing's headed and if the blame of them running a delayed action can really be assigned to this Council; the River Project has been kick started with an unexpected infusion of funds, funds that will be spent to buy and prepare property and re-locate the old property owners to new digs; Overlay zones have been created and discussed and put in place, ensuring that commercial developments be done properly; and the Budget has been adopted, although the Fire and Police don't like the "perormance" part of it (here again, this "negotiation" thing was enacted by a previous council and everyone wishes that impasse could have been avoided); and the Justice Court is up and running (nothing has changed here except that Ogden gets ALL the dollars for traffic and small claims violations instead of spliting the take with other Court Systems-now I'm sure Rudi will jump on this and tell me where I'm wrong, citing vast amounts of legals and research to back up his assertions and label this system a "cash cow").
You just flat label those who vote on an issue in a way that you disagree with as a "traitor." You have your head where the sun don't shine and regail anyone who doesn't think as you do.
Thanks goodness they don't.
So, "anonymous," what the hell's your problem. Seems to me that the Council is making votes that are generally well thought out and good for the City as a whole. You and Rudi, in your infinite ignornace, have some vendetta against Bill Cook but your way out in left field on that.
Relax!
No vendetta, Rex.
As I said earlier, I think Bill Cook is a very nice man who works very hard and at his job of running the city council staff and office.
Others, of course, may have differing opinions on this.
I merely believe he's a poor fit for the job of serving as the unofficial council "Yoda," for reasons that I've set forth above. We're still scratching our heads wondering how he could possibly have NOT KNOWN that municipal budgets are subject to later amendment under state law.
Many of us believe the council ought to re-visit the police and firefighter pay issues. These are issue separate and apart from all the others that you mention. Each issue must, of course, be considered according to its own merit.
Our public safety personnel are Ogden City's Finest employees. If anything, they ought to be treated much more generously than the common clerks and groundskeepers on the Ogden City payroll, due to the more demanding nature of the work they do.
If the government of Ogden City were to compensate our police and firefighters at the top end of the pay range for public safety employees in our region, we wouldn't be experiencing the attrition of trained personnel that we now experience, we would attract the best quality new applicants, and we wouldn't ultimately get stuck with the leftovers, i.e., people who might be unemployable anywhere else but low-paying Ogden -- which will be the predictable result of Ogden City government's continuing stinginess, if Ogden city persists on its present misguided course.
It's simple free market economics in action, Rex. The most qualified and best-trained people always flow where the compensation is greatest. The public service motive is a great motivator. And indeed our cops and firefighters exhibit that trait to an admirable degree. Still, that, alone, doesn't put food on their families' tables, does it? Paying top dollar for our elite employees simply makes good business sense.
This concept, BTW -- the concept of paying top dollar for top talent -- is the exact argument that Boss Godfrey uses to justify the ridiculous pay and perks of his "elite" A-Team of brown-nosers and boot-lickers who can't shoot straight.
The same principle ought to be applied, many of us think, to the public safety people who risk life and limb 24/7 to ensure our own public peace and safety.
We welcome you to climb out of the city government echo chamber to listen to what the unwashed townsfolk are saying. And we strongly urge you to keep your ears open. There are plenty of good ideas here at Weber County Forum.
We also welcome your contributions here; and if we're wrong about something, we welcome any comments that will set us right. But when you offer your "corrections," we urge you to do so with specificity.
I mention this, because during the past couple of days, some poor schlemiel by the handle "flyonthewall" got his ears soundly boxed, when he couldn't substantiate a vague and plainly erroneous misstatement that he'd made concerning municipal budget amendments. We wouldn't wish to see anyone else embarrassed like that.
(And try to avoid the gratuitous ad hominems in the future, Rex. Although Rudi generously cut you a pass this time, flaming your not-so-humble blogger will get you nowhere fast around here in the future.)
Rudi, you sure called it right on the strange little fly on the wall incident. You can be assured that it was one of the Mayor's simpleton followers who are buying the whole story hook line and sinker. When cornered in his/her own ignorance they set up a straw man, torched the straw man with some more nonsense, and then emperially claimed victory and dismissed you. I do believe this is a page out of the mayor's play book.
And TRex, I agree with your evaluation of what's happening at city hall. I am sure that Mr. Cook is a fine administrator and we indeed have a new set of brains on this council.
Mr. Cook comes out of a very difficult 6 year period where he was required to be a team player of the administration team as coached and captained by Mr. Godfrey. I think he deserves a chance to prove his abilities and loyalties to this new council for whom he works. Transitions are difficult, and in Mr. Cook's favor, you must admit it has been very up in the air as to which way the council was going to go. There has been plenty of evidence that the mayor had gained the strong upper hand, especially with the very initial Ernest bomb that he threw at them. So, you can't blame Mr. Cook for holding back, to see who was going to end up in control of the council, before he foresook the old order.
If the majority of this council thinks that he serves their purpose, then who better to judge? If in the end it is the council's judgement that is in question, then our only recourse is just like last fall - replace them.
I am hoping that with Mr. Cook's new found allegiance and the guidance of old and sound hands Wicks, Garcia, and even the newly religious Safsten, that this sitting council will end up doing what is right for all of the citizens of Ogden, not just those that can write imaginary $500 million dollar checks and give all us folks in Ogden free tickets to Nirvana.
I find it VERY interesting that several Letters to the Editor have lumped Wicks, Garcia, Safsten, and Jeske together, a new gang of 4, and claiming that they're the ones who sent Ernest packing and failed to get the extra 2 floors on the Wells Fargo Building, along with a couple of other issues including the wage & salary issue. Where's this guy been?
This Police and Fire thing is a proverbial disater, both for the City, the Public and those in uniform. Nobody wanted this and the sad thing was that it took on a mind and life of its own. It became a living and breathing organsim and wound up devouring itself and leaving many well meaning people in its wake.
Rudi claims that the Police and Fire are the elite of the City workforce. I might agree, as the nature of their job qualifies them of that accord. But tell a guy in IP, who keeps the computers up and running which allows the City to function properly (payroll, communication, Grants, income, etc.), or somebody in the Recorder's Office who keeps the minutes and ensures that the votes are cast properly and many other things are done correctly. And then tell these people that they aren't good enough folk to merit (pardon the pun) a similar wage, that what they do doesn't quite measure up and as well as they might do their respective jobs, they should be paid less for their time. Tell a woman that when she does the same job that a man does but gets a smaller paycheck. Tell a guy in the military (he has that certain mindset that when he joins the service he could be called into Harm's Way, but he doesn't and gets assigned to Germany instead of the Korena DMZ or Iraq or the Mid-East) that he doesn't deserve his pay because he's not "in some country ducking rounds." Tough thing to say to someone who does what he's told and does his job to the best of his ability, a job that without which the machine per se would not be "well oiled" and would grind to a halt. Is there anything to be said for the fact that these guys in uniform "have that certain mindset" that allows them to sign up for Fire or Police, a mindset that makes them "expect" and "desire" the kind of duty they apply for. Don't they expect and ACCEPT the aspect of going into Harm's Way? Isn't that fact alone part of their make-up and this "adrenaline factor" come with "their" territory?
Hell, I don't know, I'm not one of them. I just know that many people do many different jobs for many different reasons and how do you tell one that he doesn't deserve what another one is getting because of what he chose?
These are QUESTIONS ia have, not rationalizations, etc., and they all of need to be considered. Also, I'm sure that nobody who has worn the uniform of our military has ANY objection to troops in combat getting more money for that than those who get a station or post where no bullets are flying.
Then, how do you award a group that negotiates and comes to agreement in the prescribed manner but then figure out an equitable agreement with those who didn't go that way? Much to consider.
I suppose what I'm driving at here is that there are so damned many variables and other unknown factors to consider that most regular Joes, us guys who sit on the outside and look at the inside and read about what's in play in the daily newspaper of some blog, can take a position of just simply say "pay 'em more because they are cops and firefighters and that's ALL that matters." Maybe there's more to it.
Is all that matters is that one guy is worth more than another because of job selection? I know that if I were a cop or firefighter I'd sure as hell think so....but ask the guy who digs the trenches and lays the water lines or collects the trash or works the power lines if he's worth LESS than someone else because he drives a patrol car or fire truck. You might get an interesting viewpoint.
Now, Bill Cook has taken alot of abuse here, but he's taken it from those who have not been in his meetings, his work sessions, the Closed Sessions, the day to day life of running the Council. Just because someone says something happened, or somethign didn't happen, doesn't doesn't make it so. Things get lost in translation, in votes, in comments made after votes, and it's real easy for someone who hasn't been in these interactions to assign blame and say that Cook isn't doing his job or is doing it wrong and not getting the right information over to the council members. My feeling is that if you don't hear it from the horse's mouth, or experience it firsthand, then anything else is speculation and/or hearsay. It's no different than calling Bob Geiger on some of his figures about tourists driving by and stopping off in Ogden for two or three days because they see a gondola while on I-15. Or the latest thing some golfers are saying about the MOGC becoming a Par 3 or Executive golf course because it looks that way on some rendering; or that the trails will be too steep; or that 400 one million dollar houses won't fit along the old Lake Bonneville shorline because Mike Vause says they won't.
Wish I had the time to draft something a bit more eloquent, but I don't. My position here is that everyone, basically everyone, is making calls that fit their persepctive instead of being supported by facts and figures. The towns v. cities regarding the Budget is another example of the blogmeister being more thrilled with his "alleged" ear boxing than what the original premise was, which was that the Budget, it's amendments and it's adoption, are all controlled by State Regulations. The fact that both townes and cities are somewhat different in nature is correct, but they aren't different to the point that reams of words and finger pointing was called for. The guidlines and State Regs for BOTH come from the same book, the same pages, and mean the same thing as per dates, etc.
I've read horrid stuff from guys who call themselves "Dave" and "Anonymous," and most often they become "troll flames deleted," but some do remain. Yet be a little critical one of the Blogmeister's pals and the post is gone in a New York second, complete with warnings, etc.
So, this is all the nature of the beast of the blogs. Usually stuff written by those who want to conceal themselves, THEIR OPINION that is often distorted factually (but at times supported), and so on. It should work both ways and I guess that's where I'm coming from.
The question is: how?
T-Rex:
A thoughtful post, and one that recognizes [as I agree some posts here do not] the complexities involved in city governance.
One correction: you wrote "or that 400 one million dollar houses won't fit along the old Lake Bonneville shorline because Mike Vause says they won't."
Well, not exactly. First, Mr. Peterson has conceded, upon questioning, that he doesn't know how many homes of the size he is planning he can build on the property he wants to buy. Maybe, he says, as many as 400, maybe less. And since some significant part of the land on which he expects to build homes is in slope of 30% or more and so is currently un-buildable by city ordinance, your claim that doubts being raised about the number of homes he can build rests soley only Mr. Vause's say so is... well, is wrong.
Secondly: I see you are using the $1,000,000 per home figure. Good luck trying to get Mr. Peterson or the Mayor to confirm that. The latest number I heard at one of Hizzonah's Tuesday night soirees was $500,000 per home. Others tell me they are being $350,000 per home average. The point is, no one I've seen has been touting the $1,000,000 per home figure for some time now.
I understand your frustration at folks flinging around wholly unsupported numbers [like the gondola development will create 1200 jobs for example or generate $5 million or $10 million a year in tax revenues... the mayor has claimed both]. But Vause and the group he sometimes speaks for, SGO, both try hard I think to source any figures they use, and to provide sources for questioning figures others use. Suggesting, again, that nothing but Mr. Vause's say so lies behind questions about how many homes can be built on the land in question is, again, just wrong. As is the assumption you make that each of the homes, however many the land involved can support, will sell for $1,000,000 on average.
Oh great! Now this T-Rex guy is equating ditchdiggers and clerks with public safety guys and gals who put their on the line every day of their working lives to protect the townsfolks' lives and property!
Protecting the safety of society is the oldest and most important function of government, by the way -- certainly more important and fundamental than filing papers and digging holes in the ground.
And IP professionals (computer geeks)? Give us a friggin' break! Looking back to our years of immersion in the sport of political science, we don't recall any time that operating a free propaganda website for Chris Peterson was ever mentioned as a fundamental function of local government.
As egalitarian as we would like to be, we must recognise that in a world of limited resources, some occupations are by their very nature more important and socially valuable than others. Such is the case with public safety officers.
LOL! And next time we get mugged in the park or suffer having our homes burgled, We believe we shall call a computer professional for help, ha-ha-ha.
SHEESH!
There's nothing at all complicated about doing the right thing. You know what to do. Just do it. The townfolk expect results and not excuses.
And it's fundamentally un-American, we believe, to punish these people because they attempted to negotiate in good faith for a fair wage. At the very least, their compensation plans ought to be on par with all the other occupations you mention.
Just because you folks clumsily botched the situation the first go-round, that doesn't mean you can't go back and fix it.
The only reason this situation has spun out of control is because some of you folks weren't paying attention the first time around.
The situation can be easily corrected, and you damn well know it. Do it before it REALLY blows up in your faces -- which it will.
Exactly right, Rudi!
T-Rex sounds suspiciously like Kent J who likes to pontificate, either orally in print.
He sounds like a city employee, or someone who has/had access to the inner workings of the city.
Ditch diggers and those who lay the water lines do an important job. Unless they manage to suffocate themselves with shifting sand...they go home at the end of the day, for sure!
Police and firefighters never have that assurance.
BTW...ARE these people actually laying water lines?? Wow..you mean the little lord is actually upgrading the infrastructure?
Kent Jorgenson?
More like Fasi.
It's B.Glasmann
I believe it is Jorgensen trying to sound like Glassman trying to sound like Fasi.
Who ever it is they obviously enjoy, or think they do, the inner secrets of the City machinery.
A lot of this rambling message made sense, a lot didn't. It seemed a bit scitzoid.
I hope it isn't someone in a position of power or influence.
New comments are not allowed.