Council Meeting 8.15.06
By Dian Woodhouse
The big news of the night is that the Ogden City Council, in a businesslike and efficient manner, did the following:
Adopted an ordinance to put the merit scale for police and fire back to where it was before this year, enabling officers to qualify for a 5% merit raise upon achieving a score of 3, instead of 4 or 5, thereby reducing the present ticket quota for the police, among other things...
Adopted therefore a new salary schedule for all members of the classified service, and...
Established an "Employee Negotiation Review Workgroup," contingent on written responses from the three employee groups, to review the employee negotiation process...
And tabled the appointment of Dustin Chapman to the Planning Commission for two weeks.
Here's how the meeting went.
Read the rest of Dian's detailed report here.
Brandy Lee fills in more detail on last night's council meeting with this morning's Deseret News story, and the Standard-Examiner also provides this Scott Schwebke report on page B-1.
Update 8/17/06 1:45 p.m. MT: In the interest of keeping our readers fully-informed on the most recent breaking news, we link this morning's Standard-Examiner story, in which Ace Reporter Schwebke informs the lumpentownsfolk that the city council won't consider the planning commission nomination of Godfrey-lackey Dustin Chapman for at least a few more weeks. Whereas word on the street is that Boss Godfrey couldn't have possibly picked a less appropriate replacement for the soon to be vacated commission seat, Godfrey claims to know "nuttin' from nuttin"."
And there's more news. We've received a substantiated report that Boss Godfrey will soon have opportunity to nominate yet another LO-inclined gondola zombie for the planning commission, upon today's informal announcement of the sudden resignation of current commissioner Ron Wheelwright.
Can the inevitable Bobby Geiger nomination be coming up soon? Certainly he and Mr. Chapman have similar "neutral" qualifications.
8/17/06 5:31 p.m. MT: Find more robust discussion on the KSL News Community Bulletin Board.
© 2005 - 2014 Weber County Forum™ -- All Rights Reserved
64 comments:
Last night's Council meeting was the first in a very long time not marked by contention AND hostility.
Lots of kissing and making up.
Whether or not Sandy Poll's rebuke of the mayor's bloviating last week had anything to do with it, the mayor declined to speak during Administrative Comments following her scolding at the mike.
Well, we have two weeks to go til Chapman is back on the agenda. He's a nice enough kid, but kid he revealed himself to be at the mike last nite. Referring several times to the Council as, 'you guys'...and not articulating his position very well. Mostly he came across as a petulant kid who has been picked on.
Some, if not all, Council members received NO emails in favor of Dutin. No doubt that will change if he marshalls his troops.
However, it could be that real business owners and successful LO people understand the importance of the PC and know that this is only one issue that the PC will have before them. They don't want an inexperienced kid on the Commission either.
So much easier to forge alliances and try for deals at the Exchange Club, Rotary or the golf course.
Kudos to you, Dian!!
Once again, thank you Dian for the report.
And let us give a little credit to the Council. It did, I think, several admirable things last night. First: it showed a willingness to rethink previous decisions in light of subsequent events and new evidence. This is something political bodies are, as a rule, notoriously reluctant to do. Well done, ladies and gentlemen, well done.
Second: it seems that the Council is becoming more willing to exercise one of its primary responsibilities --- that is, acting as a reviewer of and check on executive action in the city.
[Please note: this does not mean the Council must be in a constant adversarial relationship with the Mayor's office. That would not be good for the public interest anymore than the Council meekly approving whatever came down from the Mayor's office would be.] But it should review carefully every proposal that come down to it in order to decide, on the best evidence and information it can assemble, whether the particular policy deserves Council support or not. It has seemed to many, myself among them, that the Council in past years has not done that as often as it should have, and has occasionally simply approved executive requests with little substantial review, as it has also stood quietly by as the Mayor's office ignored Council decisions. [Ref: when the Council refused to approve purchase of expensive rolling seats for the amphitheater a few years ago on grounds that the City budget just then could not afford them, the Mayor went ahead and bought the seats anyway, and the Council did nothing about it.]
Last night, with respect to beginning a review of labor negotiation procedures, and with respect to postponing the decision on Mr. Chapman's appointment to the Planning Commission, the Council acted as it should have and it demonstrated to the Mayor [I hope] that Ogden has a Mayor/Council form of government --- two branches, each of which acts as a check on the prudence and diligence of the other. Good on 'em.
The SE reports this morning that the Mayor objected to the Council's actions on labor and salary negotiations, insisting that such matters are the responsibility of his office. Two points to be made about that [and one way or another, the Council made both of them last night.] First: while primary responsibility for carrying on labor negotiations with city employee unions lies in the mayor's office, the process by which those negotiations are carried out is defined by ordinance and is absolutely the Council's business as well. Second: while, again, primary responsibility for carrying on labor negotiations lies in the mayor's office, when those negotiations have been bungled [and reduced by the mayor's office to merely delivering ultimatims to the police and firemen], as they were bungled this year, the Council absolutely has a right, and a responsibility, to step in in the public interest.
Ogden City government will work a great deal better for all concerned if from all this the Mayor learns a skill he has [people in city government tell me] not yet mastered. He does not, they tell me, "play well with others." He needs to learn how. For the good of the City and all of us who live and work in it.
Monotreme:
Well, Mono, on this we disagree. I think Nidecker moving its HQ here is a good thing. Five jobs, ten jobs, two jobs, it's a good thing. Serves no purpose I can see to carp about it or belittle it. I'm glad they're coming.
And I also note that they are coming to an Ogden that has access to the mountains in all seasons, magnificant walking trails in the city lands around and above the golf course, hiking trails a bit higher and biking trails as well. And easy access in about half an hour to the Olympic downhill venue at Snow Basin.
Gee, all of that here right now, and no gondola in sight. Imagine that. That outdoor equipment companies are moving any of their operations to Ogden is a good thing. Seems Ogden has a great deal to attract them. With no gondola at all.
And credit where credit is due: Mayor Godfrey's administration has done a good thing marketing the city as a good place to locate recreational sports companies: low rents, educational opportunities, magnificant access to wilderness and ski venues, including Snow Basin from the city, and so on. All here, right now. Good work, Mayor Godfrey. Now if he could just stop trying to use all this as a way to leverage his buddy's real estate speculation on public lands, and his downtown gondola [which he apparently thinks will have Paris Hilton and her Prada entourage flying to Salt Lake, taking a cab to the Frontrunner station, waiting on the platform for twenty minutes or so to ride a commuter train for another 45 minutes to Ogden just so she can ride it], we could all applaud his actions without reservation.
From the Schwebke article:
Mayor Matthew Godfrey objected to the resolution during a work session prior to the City Council meeting, saying salary negotiations are the responsibility of his administration.
What???
Am trying to figure that one out, in view of the fact that I know I have read quotes from the Mayor placing the burden of the unsatisfactory and "punitive" vote on the Council.
If salary negotiations are the sole responsibility of the administration,, the way things would work is that the negotiating process will be performed entirely by the administration, as it was this year, and the Council will have no direct contact with the groups unless impasse is reached, like it was this year, and then the groups will have One Chance to address the Council. Again like this year, which was held in a public setting and was more like a formal presentation, with no questions asked by the Council.
And then the Council will assume the full responsibility for the final decision, which would be brought about by a process it has nothing to do with?
I agree with John Valdez of UAGE--the Council in my opinion must have a more active part in negotiations. As the legislative arm of our local government, it is responsible for making the laws that cement the decisions that come out of those negotiations, and because of that, it has to know the position of both parties in order to be fair.
In a situation where there are dealings between two sides, it does help to know both of them firsthand.
You know, in reading that over, it occurs to me that the above is the way the Peterson process is working, too. Lots of meetings have occurred between the administration and Peterson, but when it comes down to it, the council will play a major part in decisions made concerning this project.
Just read Curmudgeon's post on this, and I do agree.
Ogden drops salary gauge for public safety officers
Dustin Chapman has "nothing to hide" except his previous blog entries, which have mysteriously disappeared into the ether of cyberspace. Dustin Chapman is so balanced in his viewpoints that he pratically hugged the intrepid gondola proponent Mr. Geiger (Curt) after the meeting in the hall. I am surprised that they didn't dance a little jig together and sing "Gondola Night".
The Council has a job to do by balancing the over-reaching gondolistas on the crucial Planning Commission with a fair-minded appointment. Use that veto power folks... take back your legal powers!!
As for the Mayor's discomfort with the Resolution, his position was that the Council set a Resolution that outlined the "negotiating process," something that is OWNED by the the Administration. Hardly a surprise here, since the Council worked up the Resolution without Administrative input. If one would read the Resolution closely, one would find that it's a "proposal" and an "invitation" to re-work an old Joint Resolution that may be outdated.
A correction for your "minutes," Dian: Glasmann made the motion to Approve the Resolution with Wicks bringing the Second. It passed 6-1. The Ordinaces, which re-worked the wage thing that everyone has been in an uproar over, both passed 7-0.
All in all, a good bunch of meetings last night and a prety sound report from you.
Duly noted, Room. Have sent note to Blogmeister.
The Salt Lake Trib's Christopher Smart chimes in with Ogden drops salary gauge for public safety officers
Loved the Bob Geiger quote “There are a lot of citizens here who support Mayor Godfrey.” - Yeah! Him and his immediate family.
All this seems to be a positive beginning. A means to an end perhaps?
In the room is entirely correct. I was in the room too, and clearly recall that it was Glasmann who got the ball rolling with his motion to approve. I made special note of this because I was proud of him. This is also reflected in my notes, which are littered with exclamation points and underlinings.
Apologies to all for missing this error during my cursory proof-reading.
I've now made the correction in the upper text.
Rudi & Dian thank our gentle reader for directing our attention to this.
I read the story on Nidecker coming to town in the paper today and I visited their web page.
Once again I see it a little different than what it's being hyped as or the paper got it wrong.
It's not the headquarters of the company, it's not a manufacturing location, it's a sales office and wharehousing operation the US.
What the operation in Ogden appears to be is a franchised manufactures distributorship. In other words an individual bought the right to sell Nidecker products in an assigned region (that may be all of the US or only a part of it). They buy product from the factory in Switzerland and then sell it to sporting good stored. They may hold some inventory in Ogden, hire a stock/wharehouse guy or two and hire a few sales people but that's the extent of the operation from the news article that I read. Ususally too, sales personel in this type of operation are regional and live closer to their markets. i.e. we might not see much effect from this company moving to Ogden on our economy. Agreed though, that any new business is good. It just doesn't represent a "ski hub".
A benefit from the City Council's actions last night is that the focus can now be on the citizen's accusations against Officer Jones and not have the confusing and distracting backdrop of the mayor's and Griener's actions.
I attended the city council meeting. Persons there questioned me about the WCF and where I stand on this gondola issue. Someone asked me if I was the blogger “Dan S”, I am not “Dan S”. Though I understand and support the need to remain anonymous for some people who comment here, it is dangerous when people begin to assume they know who owns the pseudonyms used here. I have posted on this blog as danny b or d Bosworth or something like that. I will, if I feel I have something to add, post as Dan Bosworth since that is how most people know me. I don’t pretend to think I have any importance here but since some of you have approached me concerning this blog, I am compelled to bore you with my prattle.
I 100% support Weber Pathway’s positions on the CP proposal. WP, in a nutshell, is FOR saving Mount Ogden Park’s trail system as is exists today. Chris Peterson presented his plan to us personally – a brave move on his part. And though I was disappointed with his presentation, he gained my respect. If he truly is unable to compromise on his proposal (as I’ve heard him say) then I am against him entirely. Personally, I think he’ll compromise, this “my way or the highway” business of his is just a display. That said, I think the Ogden/CP relationship is like Simon and Garfunkle: CP (Garfunkle) needs Ogden more than Ogden needs CP.
I tend to stand more on the Smart Growth side but also keep my distance so I can retain some semblance of objectivity. I have found the Geigers, the Halls, the Vauses, the Godfreys, the Beechs, and others to have valid opinions on Ogden City happenings. I have always been treated kindly by all of them. Maybe that’s simply because I have little influence in Ogden but I like to think it’s because these are all good people who share my love and concern for Ogden. Folks shouldn’t have to agree on these Ogden issues to appreciate the concern for our town that drives their activism.
Current city happenings have made me emotional and irrational at times, I find that by attending city council meetings and talking to people on BOTH sides, I can maintain a clear view of the issues. E.g. After sharing this forum’s anger with the mayor over the “quota” issue, I listened to his comments at the last city council meeting via Podcast and found he made some good points. I am too easily affected by biased comments made in this blog and on the street. I need to get info directly from the source if I am to earn a worthy opinion.
I wrote a letter to the city council last Monday urging they turn down Dustin Chapman for the city planning commission. I would have done the same thing had my friend Sharon been recommended. Not because I dislike these people, but because their bias would skew their judgment on the gondola issue. After the gondola issue has passed; both would likely make fine members of the planning commission.
On the van issue: I support the officers but the wording on their banner was inflammatory and could have been better chosen. I don’t think the WCF as a whole emphasized this enough. The WCF often has interesting and useful info and often scoops the SE. But the bias here is clear – and that isn’t bad. An un-biased blog would be boring (like this post for example). WCF is probably Ogden’s most influential and most visited blog. But be careful, there are real world consequences to what is said here.
So release the hounds on this comment, I can take it. If you wish to lay in to me privately, my e-mail is dan@idlepet.com. Thanks for tolerating my prattle.
Does Jesse Garcia truly believe that the Council's power vis-a-vis the Mayor has not eroded over the thirteen years he has been on it?
Is that what he really said in the news paper article?
Is he missing something big here, or am I?
I want to congratulate the Council and especially Garcia, Glasmann and Jeske for taking the lead in resolving this thorny little problem.
As "Officer" has pointed out, this does not address the Officer Jones issue, he is still being persecuted by the machine that is desperate to save face for their own recent perfidity.
So I say to Matt Godfrey "free Matt Jones from this obscene witch hunt that he is suffering at the hands of your police chief who is trying to cover his own and your butts".
Mr. Mayor you witnessed last night how decent government is supposed to handle crisis. Grow up, be a man for once, and tell Greiner to re-instate Jones and stop digging this hole that is likely to cave in and smother both of you.
Dan B,
I found your comments most appropriate which says a lot coming from a naysayer like me. Thank you for presenting “other” sides of various issues.
That being said, I still have reservations about the mayor’s track record over salary negotiations. This is the same guy who negotiated the sweetheart Stuart Reid deal and then handed him back a similar position with a more-than-generous-considering-your-track-record salary.
As for the “Vangate” issue going away. I think we’ve just started. Think about it. At the very least, a Police Chief queried a database (State, NCIC, or whatever database it was) out of curiosity and without cause. You just can’t do that and it’s easy to prove based on his own admission of the series of events. Godfrey may have distanced himself enough that he can weasel out of this, but Greiner (and by extension Ogden) is in for a long legal battle, and as Officer mentioned, should be on some kind of leave until the matter is resolved.
Greiner vs. Reid? I think this election might be a good time to cast a vote for my good friend Mickey Mouse.
Local TV covering this now:
ABC 4 Ogden Rescinds Ticket Quota For Police
KSL 5 Ogden Voids Police Pay Standard
Ogden City Rescinds Ticket Quota For Pay Ordinance
Dan,
One thing on the CP proposal... the many discussions that I have had on this proposal, with both LO people and SGO people, have been very clear on one point. In order for the monetary figures to work, the entire project has to be built basically as is. It cannot be a piece meal project like most other large buildouts. The numbers are interdependent on all areas of the project coming together. The gondola cannot be profitable on its own... the resort is in the same boat, if it is built as it envisioned (motorless resort). The complexities of a gondola station in Mount Ogden Park (with the increased traffic through the neighborhoods, etc.) is prohibitive to the "resort only" concept. The golf course sale and home development makes no sense when viewed by the citizens, in light of quality of life without the connecting mountain resort and gondola. Therefore, it might be a take it or leave it kind of deal.
For the city and Chris Peterson to benefit from this project... all the pieces need to come together. This makes the whole concept a very risky move for the city... and while I understand risk/reward... the complexities of this project really give me pause.
Mono:
Yes, I noticed her little shilling for the Mayor's pipe dream, and I thought, like you, that the odds of the company moving anything here because maybe kinda sorta a gondola might someday exist that would not take employees to Snow Basin were slim and none. And if the company did come here because of the gossimer promise of a gondola that won't go to Snow Basin, then I, like you, would want to pull any investments I had in that company out. Fast.
Sorry if I misinterpreted the main point of your post. Seems to me we are pretty much in agreement up down and sideways on this.
Amen and Amen to Ozboy and Officer!
I think nearly ALL of us agree that Mark DiCaria is a fine man who discharges his duty with honor and integrity. (have I heard that word before??) However, in this egregious miscarriage of justice, Mark is the WRONG man to be involved in the investigation of crimial, constitutional and civil proceedings of the Cheif and Godfrey. Since Ogden is IN Weber County, then it behooves everyone involved who is interested in honor, integrity, and propriety to have the SL Atty's Office handle this.
Yes....if Matt Jones is on admin. leave, why not the Cheif?? Or, in the meantime, the mayor has or has taken the authority to have Matt Jones reinstated...so do it.
I'm afraid this city is going to be sued for millions ?? since the ACLU is now involved.
Is the Nidecker guy the one who is quoted as saying that he's excited to be here, 'because I can step outside my office and hop onto the gondola'??? Guess Godfrey didn't tell him about the PROCESS.
Hope he's still hoppable after twenty years.
Dan: Enjoyed your post. Not boring at all. Very articulate.
One difference (among many that come to mind)...but only on civic activism, I would refuse to be considered for an appointment on the PC BECAUSE of my bias on the Peterson/Godfrey/Gondola/land sale, etc PLAN.
I'm not objective, Dustin is not objective, and many others aren't eihter. BUT, as Amy Wicks agreed with me last nite, many who are able to look at both sides dispassionately and have the experience, wisdom, life and professional skills to consider this project for the good OF Ogden CAN be found in this town!
As, I think Curm brot up, IF this Plan is so right for Ogden, why would the PC have to be stacked in the mayor's favor? Let the facts resonate where they may.
Sorry for the rephrasing, Curm.
I was very pleased with the Council last nite. There is more work to be done. And, yes, Ozboy, Jesse did say that...in the meeting, as quoted in the paper.
Some members of the 'old' council must've smiled.
Anyway, the Jones issue must be resolved...Dustin's app't needs to be stopped. He should withdraw his nomination. That would demonstrate his maturity and desire for a strong and prosperous Ogden. He can serve and use his enthusiasm for our city on other committees. Also, save himself embarrassment.
Lovely Jennifer:
Blither, Blather,'does it matter?
All in all, it's just foolish chatter!!
COMMENTS FIRST ON THE AGENDA!!!
Just looked at the KUTV Ch2 news blurb about the quotagate:
"....city officials were trying to generate revenue for a new justice court".
Well! Isn't that intresting? A news organ willing to say it outloud!
To Anonymous that is talking about the CP development.
One flaw in your comments, CP is conceding that it will take 10 to 20 years to put it all together. That's one heck of a long time between projects for all the interdependent pieces to leverage off one another before it all comes together. Might as well stand on their own as should all good investments. With all of the interdependence, it is as risky as it gets!
Besides, do you really think you can put 350 condo's in Malan Basin? Malan Basin is supposed to be the whole reason for all of these other developments and he hasn't mentioned boo about it other than providing an artist drawing of his mountain high dream. I think that's because he knows it would be hard to shoe horn in a development 1/10 that size into Malan Basin.
This is about a real estate housing development, on our open space, our Mount Ogden Park and golf course. The sooner we start questioning the other parts of this so called master development, the sooner the fact that the other parts don't work will prove this out.
The newspaper has reported that Officer Jones has being accused by some Ogden residents of criminal conduct some months ago in the course of his police work. Are the the specific accusations against him public knowledge? Does anyone know?
A citizen complaint against an Officer, is open to the public as I understand it. Just request it.
Anon:
I don't think those allegations have been made public. They are part of a performance review being conducted in-house by the OPD and are now being looked into in a broader context by the County Attorney. All this is normal. Allegations are usually not made public until after they are investigated. Most personnel matters are conducted behind closed doors until they are resolved, and that's as it should be.
The question your post raised in my mind is this: if in fact credible allegations of criminal conduct were lodged against the officer months ago, how could it be that on such a serious matter Forgetful John Grenier, Ogden's police chief and Republican candidate for the Utah State Senate, could have managed to "forget" he intended to suspend the officer until he got a call from the Mayor who was tailing the officer's wife downtown for... well, let's just say "other reasons"? Seems odd to me.
"I heard it on the grapevine" that the 'charges' against Officer Jones were already resolved.
Any HPS know the truth?
Youu know, Godfrey is so hungry for the media spotlight that he HAS to comment on everything! "Chapman's nomination is based on his qualifications and isn't a political move to promote the private plan by developer Chris Peterson to buy Mount Ogden Golf Course from the city and build an elaborate gondola system,upscale housing and the Malan's Basin resort, Godfrey said". 'He is as qualified as any member on the Planning Commission', he said.
Chapman thinks he's a valuable asset to the PC because he speaks Spanish, 'enabling him to reach out to the city's Hispanic population.'
IMHO, if any 'Hispanic' builder comes before the PC with his/her ideas, they should be presented in ENGLISH.....damn, that irritates me!
Godfrey can't let the Council be interviewed in the SE, he has to have his redundant remarks printed too.
Sheesh, what a pulblicity hound. Well, I hope all his wordiness comes back to bury him. Just reread all the changing stories of the sorry Sherlock Homes affair.
There's no way to disprove the mayor's claim about Dustin's nomination having nothing to do with his support for the Peterson project. Still, it looks pretty implausible, when you consider that both of the mayor's other new nominees to the Planning Commission were also public supporters of Lift Ogden. One is Janith Wright; the other was apparently rejected by the Council in private session. All three names appeared in Lift Ogden's newspaper ads back in June. It's my understanding that in order to be listed in these ads, a person had to sign a statement of fealty, specifically saying that they support the gondola and the sale of the Mt. Ogden Golf Course.
The pattern is even more obvious when you look at who was not reappointed to the Planning Commission: Shalae Larsen, whose name appeared for a time on the Smart Growth supporters list.
(Reminder: Unlike Lift Ogden, Smart Growth Ogden is not a single-issue organization and does not expect everyone on its supporters list to endorse every plank in its platform. In fact, much of its platform is pretty vague, and it has taken a good deal of criticism for this.)
To his credit, at least the mayor reappointed one Planning Commissioner whose term was expiring, and who has taken no public position (as far as I'm aware) on the Peterson proposal.
It'll be interesting to see what happens if the Council rejects Dustin, or if his name is withdrawn. Will the mayor choose yet another name from the Lift Ogden supporters list? Will he try to find a closet LO supporter? Or will he choose someone who's truly neutral or undecided?
Does anyone have a link to the names on this lift ogden petition?
Dan S:
You apply I think too high a standard of proof vis a vis the motives behind the Mayor's nominations. His claim that his nominations to the PC are in no way influenced by the nominees' stand on the gondola/Peterson plan is simply not credible. As you correctly sum it up: One present member known to support SGO refused reappointment. One member with no known position on the gondola/Peterson proposals reappointed. Three people nominated for the resulting two open positions and all of them are long time committed supporters of Lift Ogden. It simply doesn't pass the duck test.
As for what the mayor will do now, I suspect he will exert all his influence to get Mr. Chapman, who does not have an "open mind" on the matter and has made that plain by his public attacks on the integrity and motives of those who have dared to oppose what he supports. What the Mayor should do... and would do if he were smart about all this and confident that his plans can stand up to any fair scrutiny --- is withdraw Mr. Chapman's nomination in the name of restoring harmony since it has [however unfairly, he might say] become divisive and substitute in his place the name of someone who is not publicly committed on either side. That would be both a principled thing to do and, tactically [from the LO point of view], a smart thing to do.
I doubt he will do it.
How can the mayor make the comment that Dustin is as qualified as any of the other members on the Planning Commission.
For one thing he's 25, probably learned his spanish while on a mission, which means if he went straight to school after the mission he should be a senior this year at school.
This doesn't compare to the vast experience and knowledge that exists with the current planning commision members. Dustin just doesn't have the time in the saddle yet to be considered for a position on the commission.
Additionally, I think the mayor owes the current members an apology for saying that Dustin is equally as qualified. What an insult to our present members.
Would you give us the name of the third LO person in the LO newsletter considered for the PC?
Wright, Chapman and-------?
I don't really know much about the other membrs...could you give a few words as to experience, etc on each one?
Thank you, Dan S. and others who know.
Getting an apology from the little guy for the insult he visited upon the current Planning Commisioners is just about as likely as getting an apology from the him for the gross insult that he and his strong arm chief are currently visiting upon Officer Jones.
I say" "Free Matt Jones!"
Bite the bullet Mathew, be a man about it, admit you screwed up, and the whole thing will blow over before you know it. Otherwise I fear it is going to bite your ass big time.
Admit what?
English asked if his so called charges have been dropped or resolved.
Who knows?
There is a good article on the Ogden Planning Commission in a publication of the American Planning Association-
See:
Thinking Outside the Box: Ogden, Utah, Planning Commission
Amy...thank you. Will look at it when have a minute.
Curious: The third person was Steven Prisbey. I hasten to add that I have no idea why he is no longer under consideration--perhaps he withdrew his name for personal reasons. I should also add that my information comes from Prisbey himself, by way of an intermediate acquaintance who assured me that he was not told to keep the information confidential.
I've never met Prisbey or Wright and I have no first-hand knowledge of their qualifications.
Curm: Excellent points, all, except that I don't know whether Prisbey or Wright could accurately be called "long time" supporters of Lift Ogden. As for the standard of proof, I'll agree that the preponderance of the evidence points toward a LO litmus test being applied by the mayor for new PC nominees. I'm not sure it yet rises to "clear and convincing," much less "beyond a reasonable doubt." But the news of an additional vacancy on the PC now means that the mayor will have to come up with at least one more name, so we'll have more evidence soon enough.
Ms. Wicks: Thanks for the link! Very informative article, except that it repeats the LO lie that the gondola was rated second in the transit corridor study, and adds the false implication that its low rating was merely because of some arbitrary prejudice on the part of the Federal Transit Administration.
Anon: The Lift Ogden newspaper ads were published in the Standard-Examiner on June 10 and 12. I believe that every name in the first ad also appears in the second, so the second is all you need. It appeared on page 6B. But I don't know of an electronic version, unless someone saved it when it would have been available through the SE web site. (You can get old news articles through the Weber County Library site, but not ads.)
Prisbrey is as pro-gondola, pro-LO, pro-Godfrey as they come. Other than that, he’s in his late 20’s and cares deeply about the city and wants to make a difference, he’s just been misguided and duped by the LO chorus. In that sense, he has some similarities to Chapman.
Richard Hyer is on the PC and he is as fair and unbiased as they come. He’s the prototype good citizen you want on the commission.
Prisbrey is as pro-gondola, pro-LO, pro-Godfrey as they come. Other than that, he’s in his late 20’s and cares deeply about the city and wants to make a difference, he’s just been misguided and duped by the LO chorus. In that sense, he has some similarities to Chapman.
Richard Hyer is on the PC and he is as fair and unbiased as they come. He’s the prototype good citizen you want on the commission.
Mr. Humble,
I don't know where you got your facts but I am not a LO-ite. Although I have been to a couple public LO meetings (last spring), I have never had a LO sign in my yard or and have never stated that I fully support the gondola project.
Like Rudi, I have always liked the idea of a gondola to the top of the mountain, however the jury is still out for me on the Peterson plan as there are too many details still needed for me to support it.
Also for what it's worth I am 31 years old (I'll take 20s any day) and I don't think I’ve been duped by anyone.
P.S.
A post earlier was true. I was indeed asked if I would be willing to serve on the Planning Commission, I agreed to do so if my name was approved by the city council.
The council as a whole felt I may be in need of more experience for an important position like the planning commission and denied the appointment.
I fully respect their decision and will remain willing to serve Ogden in any capacity in the future if ever asked to do so.
Steven P.:
If I've mis-characterized your views in discussing appointments to the PC, please accept my apologies. I will be careful to reflect your views [as you've stated them here] accurately if the matter comes up again. Again, my apologies.
So Young Steve, what is your opinion of whether Chapman is "Pro Gondola" or not, and do you believe him when he says he has only been very lightly involved in LO?
And, were you involved yourself in a pro gondola web site?
Curm...no offense taken, thank you.
Ozboy, I regard Dustin a good guy and a friend and it's not my place to comment regarding his political views. I will leave that to him if he feels inclined.
It's true I own the ogdengondola.com name; however, if you take a look at it you will see that it is not a pro or anti gondola site but merely an informative site that I haven't done much with. I buy and sell domain names occasionally and frankly thought it may be a desirable domain name in the future. For instance I also own utafrontrunner.com and lithiumenergy.com; random I know, but perhaps profitable down the road.
As for the blog linked from that site; I haven't had any involvement in that for quite some time.
Steven P:
Thank you for corroborating my story; I'm always uncomfortable repeating hearsay.
I guess I'm confused by your lukewarm appraisal of the Peterson project. Your name did appear in the June 10 and June 12 Lift Ogden newspaper ads, and I saw the statements they were asking supporters to sign prior to the running of the ads. If I'm not mistaken, those statements specifically expressed support for all the major components of the Peterson project including the urban gondola and the sale of Mt. Ogden Golf Course. Can you shed any light on what level of support we should assume of those whose names appeared in the ads?
I'm also confused by what you say about the ogdengondola site and blog. The latest blog post is actually dated 8/8/2006, and regardless of the dates, the information on the main blog page, posted by "ogdengondola", seems to echo the Godfrey/LiftOgden party line pretty faithfully. If you really wish the site to be "informative," why do you include the mayor's FAQ but not SmartGrowth's?
Ah common now Steve, don't do a Godfrey on us here.
I didn't ask you to address Chapman's political views, I really meant what do you think about his representations that he had only a minor passing involvement with the Gondola Scheme.
Has he or hasn't he had a major on going part in LO and all things Godfrey and Gondola?
Did he or did he not remove a number of his own writings on the subject from his blog site.
Was that or wasn't that an attempt to obscure the truth about his real involvement with the Gondola?
I don't think any of those questions are directly related to his political views.
By the way, I actually like Chapman in spite of our differing views on Godfrey and Gondola's. I just cannot fathom where and how he could possibly bring anything pertinent to the Planning Commission.
And just what are his Engineering credentials anyway? I have read a few disparaging remarks about his qualifications. Perhaps you or he could straighten us out on that?
I think he and you have bright futures in Ogden City government if you take this wonderful opportunity that you have before you to observe how not to run a city government. Your guru Godfrey can teach just about every single lesson there is on that. His areas of special knowledge are: Hubris, Arrogance, flexible truths and low integrity, business incompetence, Poor personel choices, and down right defective thinking.
About the only real bad public governance trick you might not learn from him is personal enrichment. I don't think the little dude actually steals money for his own use. The smelly Stu Reid severance had graft written all over it, but I still don't think the little feller is sticking any cash in his own pocket.
Officer Jones's complaints have not been resolved yet. While the investigating LT was on his week long vacation. Two more complaints arrised.
Now there is a complaint from Jan,Feb,May and July. It is strange that all of these old complaints just happened to come out hours after the mayor followed him around the city.
Most of us at OPD know that Jones will be fired. For some reason or another. For the chief and mayor to save face he has to be fired.
No matter why he is fired it will be unjust. I guarentee that if I was given 4,5 or 6 months and all the resources that the police have. I could make anybody look like a bad person.
It is one person against a Mayor, Chief and City. How could he win.
We are all also aware that he won't go down alone. The chief and hopefully mayor will also go down with him.
By next week there will proabably be two more complaints against him.
But he is still fighting.
Go Jones.
FREE MATT JONES
Is Jones being represented by the ACLU??? Against Cheif Greiner and Godfrey??
Does he have another atty to handle a labor dispute? Are those cases separate?
Is money still being donated for a legal defense fund for Matt??
Please tell us all you know.
BTW..were 2 Strike Force officers demoted?
What is their status now?
Come on, Steve P- At the bottom of each page of your website Ogdengondola.com, it says "Copyright 2005 Friends of Ogden Gondola".
Do you define "Friend" differently than I do?
Will the post made there in reply to ****'s (former Ogden resident back to visit) comments on your blog be wiped out again? Don't the "Friends of Ogden Gondola" want him to have information on WCF and SGO's websites?
I think the mayor and the chief should be running for their careers after the investigation is complete. but I am sure that CP will take care of them with all the millions he has to throw around.
Can anyone tell me why the mt Ogden golf course does not go to the highest bidder and only to CP. doesn't it state in law that there should be a bidding process when something that big is being sold from the taxpayers.
doesn't the mayor have to put it up[ for bid? anyone know?
Steve P.
I just thought you should know that there is nothing deader than a dead politican.
that is you, larsen, moshor, stephenson, safsten, and jorgenson. are all dead politically.
I Guess that goes for Godfrey and forgetful John too.
Free Matt Jones, Stop voting for Republicans.
Curm or Dian or anyone who knows,
The mayor has said that his office has decision making power over the city council on several issues (e.g. nieghborhood planning). I've read WCF comments claiming that the city council gave power up to the mayor. Also, I think it was claimed in the city council meeting last Tuesday. When and how did this "loss" of power occur? I thought there was a balance of power.
Did the city council undo the pay and raise policies set in place by the mayor &/or OPD chief (is the "performance evalutaion" system that incudes ticket writing by OPD no longer in place)?
In Re: Officer Jones
Might be prudent to just wait a bit to see how things turn out. There are investigations under way. We've had rumors posted here that the disciplinary matters have been resolved in his favor. That they have not. That he's going to be fired. That he isn't. At this point, seems to me, we don't know what is happening, or how it will turn out. I'm not sure all the rumors are doing anyone much good, including the officer involved. We don't even know what complaints have been lodged against him or by who.
Sometimes, patience is the wisest course. This may be one of them.
Actually Ogden III, Mr. Chapman taught himself Spanish after learning Portuguese while in South America. If you are going to slanderize, at least do it with the right facts.
The editorial in today's SE seemed to answer my question somewhat.
Dan B:
That editorial was painfully poor. The editorial page at the SE is a puzzle to me. Every now and the editorial board produces a cogent, well-reasoned, well-written editorial. Sometimes even advocating a policy I oppose.
And then, they come up with something like today's fawning exercise in... in I'm not sure what.
Editorials like this make it hard to counter the argument that the SE has made itself into the house organ for the Godfrey administration.
Is Godfreyitis catching on in Utah County???
Gondola's owners want Utah County to sponsor a $2.5 million bond for a restoration project
Dan B.,
The opinion that the Council has in part lost power is based partly on Ogden City Ordinance 4-3A-5, "Conveyance of Real City Property," which was amended in 2003 and 2005. I am furnishing a link to the ordinance below, from WCF archives.
You will see that property sales "shall be made by the mayor" IF the planning commission determines that, in the case of publicly owned property, the sale conforms to the general plan. Insofar as the Council is concerned in such a transaction, all that the Mayor has to do is to notify it, and hold public hearings. The Mayor does not need Council approval to make these sales, it appears.
Insofar as your police question, merit raises are tied to a merit system. Scores are from 1 to 5, and the number of tickets one writes is part of that system. The more tickets written, the higher the score on that section of the merit system.
What the Council did was in June pass an ordinance dictating that a certain score had to be obtained in the merit system in order to qualify for a 5% raise. This score was 4-5, and this was the one deemed unrealistically high, especially in view of the fact that other city employees only have to score a 3 on their merit systems to qualify for a 5% raise. Until this year, police and fire also had to score a 3 for that raise, I believe--then, in June, it was raised to 4-5 by the Council, and this week was put back to where it was before at a 3.
Below is Ordinance 4-3A-5. Letter F in the unrevised one seemed to indicate that proceeds from the sale of parks should go only to parks or park improvements. That is not the case in this revision, as you will see.
4-3A-5 Latest Revision, copied from online edition of Ogden Municipal Code:
Ogden City Code Section 4-3A-5 (Amending Original 2003 Ordinance)
The part of the Utah County gondola article (referenced above by anon) that caught my eye:
But first things first: Commissioners need to OK a feasibility study to see if the investment is worth it.
"We know it's doable. Now the question is, if it's economically viable," Racker said. "Nobody wants to build an albatross or a drain on county resources. We know there's demand; we just don't know if the demand would make it viable."
economically viable;
albatross;
drain on county resources;
Things our mayor can't be bothered with.
Southsider:
Good catch on the Utah County gondola story. It seems that Utah County commission has been taken over by bolsheviks who don't think public money should be committed to a private development project without having a clue whether the project has a hope in hell of drawing enough customers to succeed. [And I note, in the same article, that the private developer who is asking for public funding paid for the necessary engineering studies required for his application for public funds out of his own pocket. Imagine that.]
Don't those people down in Utah County understand that once the magic word "gondola" has been spoken, the only way to proceed is to commit millions of dollars in public funds up front, before any feasibility studies have been done, and to raise that money by selling off a public park or two to real estate developers. [Inexplicably, Utah County seems not to be planning to sell off a single public park to finance this gondola rebuilding. What is wrong with those people?]
And all they're thinking of committing is $2.5 million in public funds. Ogden is looking at spending $35 million plus to build its city gondola, and at selling off the largest park in the city to raise the funds. Time enough after the park is sold and the money is spent to look into whether the whole scheme makes any economic sense or not.
"Feasibility study, economically viable" - what concepts - and the public isn't having to pay for this background research.
I used to think that maybe Little Matt G. was just a naive boy who had gotten too close to the flame of the rich and famous and was being used and manipulated by them.
I'm changing my mind - these people all seem to deserve each other. The problem is that the rest of us are pawns in their dirty games.
City Council, please do your homework and make decisions based on what is best for Ogden. The voters will remember and appreciate you for it.
New comments are not allowed.