The city council decision is in.
The council's unanimous selection for Bill Glasmann's vacated At-Large council Seat "A":
Susan E. Van Hooser!
Councilwoman Van Hooser took the city council oath 45 minutes ago.
Weber County Forum congratulates Mrs. Van Hooser for her new appointment, and once again thanks the other 38 Emerald City citizens who also participated as applicants in the process.
We anticipate posting a more detailed report later on, but wanted to get the basic information out now.
Consider the floor open for discussion.
Update 9/28/06 9:48 a.m. MT: Your humble blogmeister has this morning whipped up and uploaded a brief summary of last night's council appointment special event; and Scott Schwebke's thumb-nail rendition can be found this morning on the Std-Ex archive site.
We ask that our readers foregive the delay in providing this update. Our blog host has been experiencing SEVERE AND ANNOYING technical problems since late last night. Special apologies to the guy who emailed us during this morning's wee hours, complaining that our blog "ate" his comment masterpiece. It ate a number of comments, actually, although we were later able to restore most of these.
We'll stand by for continuing reader questions or comments.
© 2005 - 2014 Weber County Forum™ -- All Rights Reserved
49 comments:
I hope that the whore Glasmanns' replacement is better at handling the heat than good ol Billie Boy.
We sure would like to know more about her.
monotreme:
I would like to have known more about her, and the other candidates, going in. I suspect we are going to get a lot more information now that she's been appointed.
I hope it was truly a unanimous vote from the git-go and not a brokered unanimous vote. Meaning it was less than that until a majority was achieved, and then was made unanimous for appearances sake [like they do at contested presidential nominating conventions.] Since she will be an unelected Councilwoman with the full voting powers of an elected one, it would be good [for Ogden] if she had, without demur, the full support and confidence of all the elected ones. I look forward to learning more about her.
Curmudgeon:
Actually, that's a picture. I used to love watching the last of the "old style" conventions when I was a kid...
"The great Fourth Ward of Ogden, home of Weber State University, a former turkey farm, and the gorgeous Beus Canyon trailhead, proudly casts its one vote for Susan E. Van Hooser!!!" [wild applause]
Since we're congratulating our new City Council member, it doesn't feel quite right to be 'fomenting revolution'. However, I just found this intriguing article on the Salt Lake Trib's website "Lehi mayor scoffs at push to change form of government".
It's just too interesting to not share.
Mono:
Ah, yes. The good ol' days when the networks offered gavel to gavel coverage because there was actual news to report. ["Walter, Walter... the Ohio delegation just went into emergency caucus out in the hallway. I don't know why yet, but Sen. Humprhey's aides don't look happy about it....."]. Drama, news and history, all wrapped up together. Now, all decided by primaries long before. Viewers, not being complete idiots, understood that an bailed on convention coveage by the millions. So I don't blame the nets for abandoning the conventions except for a few set piece performances. [The keynote, acceptance speech, etc.]
Ah, I miss the days when nominations were decided by wheelin' and dealin' in smoke filled rooms just off the convention floor.... And as a historian, I'd be hard put to make the case that the modern primary route produces better picks. The smoke filled rooms gave us FDR, Ike, Stevenson, Kennedy, Dewey and Truman as nominees. Have we done better, as a nation, with Carter, Nixon, the Shrub, and Kerry as nominees? I wouldn't want to defend that proposition in a debate.
Damn. I am getting old.
This was a great nite to see the Council come back with a unanimous decision that appears to be good for the city! Kudos to them!!
Susan Van Hooser handles herself very well and has maturity and graciousness.
Two virtues (among many) missing from Godfrey's character.
His displeasure was shameful to see. He smiled broadly at Jeremy Taylor...and did his deadpan stare when the Council came back into Chambers and the vote was in for Susan. Did I see a jaw muscle twitch??
I expected the entire Council to get on their feet to shake her hand, it didn't happen..but they were pleased and shook her hand later....your 'lustrous potentate SAT in his chair as if stuck there with super glue!!! He didn't smile, look her in the eyes, nor did he EVER go to her and shake Susan's hand!! He did huddle with Curt Geiger....Curt leaning over the counter into Godfrey's attentive ear. What dirty deeds might they have been planning? Hmmm?
What a disgusting lack of manners and social grace. And people wonder, in this town, why some who come to Ogden don't feel welcomed by this mayor????
Because this little manipulator only welcomes those who join his amen choir. And, pray tell, what document gives this master manipulator the 'right' to sit in the Council's Closed Exec Session as they discussed who the newest member would be?
He did the same thing with the sordid Chapman affair. The Council rightly rejected Chapman. But, the mayor went in there, in my opinion, to pressure the Council to vote HIS way!
It was improper then..and certainly improper tonite.
Jesse should have told the bad boy that he was excused...and waited for Godfrey to exit.
Why wasn't a photographer there to snap Susan's picture? Since the mayor of the city,! doesn't have the grace of a ruptured goose, (is gander too flattering?) to get up and welcome Susan, I would encourage the Council, in future, to stand, come down in front of their desks and shake hands with whomever is being honored.
This was a most auspicious occasion and honor for Mrs. Van Hooser and a little hoopla was in order!
Shame on Godfrey. Pouting and huddling with Geiger shows his embarrassing, to us, lack of character. He is not an upstanding representative for Ogden.
7th grade antics...pouting, sulking and refusing to be gracious and welcoming. Grow up, you little toad.
Thanx to the outstanding citizens who came forward to vie for that Council seat. I hope some will run for election! It is heartening to observe so many talented citizens willing to serve.
In my opinion, the rejection of Chapman and the vote FOR Van Hooser, in spite of Godfrey inappropiately going into the private deliberations of the Council appears to be the Council saying, 'up your nose, Matt'.
You guys would know that Ms VanHooser is the right person if you had been there and watched Godfrey. If looks could kill, the whole Council would be dead. He sat glowering and lost in that chair that is too big for him and pouted until everyone left. He didn't get out to congratulate Ms. VanHooser or even welcome her to the Council. He sure is a TURKEY!! No manners, no finesse, behaving just like the spoiled little brat that he is. I guess his two flunkies on the Council couldn't persuade the other Council members to go with Admiral Taylor. As quuickly as that executive session was over, I think it really was an unanamious vote. The Council just barely had time to eat and they were back! It doesn't seem logical that there was much debate going on.
All the candidates did a great job with the questions and sounded very good tonight, even better than last week! It could have been another long night, if the Council hadn't been in agreement right from the first. No, I definitely think it was UNANIMOUS!
BTW...Susan was the unanimous decision from the 'git-go'.
Heartening, eh?
Schwebke was taking lots of notes...hope he'll do a bang-up job for tomorrow's editon of the SE. Would have been a nice touch for the SE to send over a photographer!
This is big news, and certainly the SE should treat it as such.
Sharon:
Thanks for that information about the unanimous vote. That is good news. A split decision on an un-elected Councilmember would not have been good for the City.
OK, let me play contrarian again.
Two points:
Ms. Van Hooser may be the best possible choice from among the candidates. [I hope she is.] She may turn into an excellent interim Council member. [I hope she does.] That in no way changes the fact that the Council muffed its own procedures and did not provide to the interersted public the kind of information on the Fab Five that it promised to provide, and in a timely fasion. I hope the Council is not put in the position Mr. Glassman put it in again, but if it ever is, it needs to handle the matter with respect to public notice a lot better than it did this time. And some staff evidently need a quickie refresher course in what constitutes a public document.
Second: Not having been there, I can't comment on the Mayor's expresion as the decsion was announced. However, all this gleeful chortling about what some say was his evident displeasure seems way premature. Ms. VH has, as yet, no record on the Council. None of us... absolutely none of us... know yet what kind of Councilwoman she will turn out to be. Permit me to gently remind you that there was similar chortling vis-a-vis the Mayor's expectations when Mr. Glassman was elected... and we all know how that turned out. Simply put, [and as you all know I am no fan of the Mayor] Mr. Godfrey's displeasure [presuming those there read it right] is not, I think, sufficient reason to be celebrating.
So, congratulations, Ms. VH. Welcome. Pick up your flak jacket and helmet at the door, and get ready to receive emails and phone calls and letters from the citizenry. You are now a public person. I hope, sincerely, that a year from now I'm urging you to run for election to the seat.
We shall see.
You are welcome...i asked on the other thread if anyone caught the article about the Syracuse Council thinking their mayor has too much control??
Shall we hold our collective breath anticipating our Council to whack Matt's greedy sticky fingers?
Anyone know Matt's family from the early years? Just wondering if his mother stuck a bar of LAVA in his mouth for lying?
Doggone it, Curm.
Those who were there saw Matt's bad manners and his 'displeasure'.
Who is chortling? We just hope she'll succeed, and if she irks the pouting mayor...well, as Martha Stewart is fond of saying.."that's a good thing."
The mayor's actions were deplorable and he should go to charm school.
Mercy:
Not doubting you, Mercy. Merely said that since I wasn't there, I couldn't comment on how he looked or what it meant. Though it seems to be well established opinion that the Mayor does not play well with others, and is given to snit fits when he's told no by someone. Anyone. And I think Sharon's first long post above, and John's definitely qualify as chortling.
One other point [not aimed at you, Mercy.] I notice all the dire predictions that the Mayor had it wired, the fix was in, etc have apparently been proven wrong. Seems to me this Council, since the last election, has proven itself, by its actions, not to be a rubber-stamp council for the Administration, just as it has proven itself, by its actions, not to be a blindly obstructionist Council [opposing anything the mayor proposes because the mayor proposes it]. Seems on the evidence to be a Council reasonably attentive to the public good, to its oversight responsibilities, and trying to do a good and responsible job [even if they have sometimes chosen as I would not have]. I'm for cutting them a little slack for a while, with respect to speculations [or more often pronouncements] on their "real" motives and "real" intentions, etc.
I think they've earned it.
I understand that all the Council members received letters tonight from some concerned golfers. From what I heard Godfrey is going to make sure Mt. Ogden Golf Course loses money. So far this year, Todd Brenkman has turned that course around and it is operating in the black. That isn't good for the Mayor, because he no longer has an excuse to sell it. He is having Earl Kemp destroy the golf course. According to Mr. Kemp the Mayor hired him to "redesign and improve the golf course." There are several things wrong with that premise: 1. Mr. Kemp is not a golf course architect; 2. Other golf courses that Mr. Kemp has been involved with have lost hundreds of thousands of dollars, and some that he was in on the ground floor, never have quite made it as a successful golf course. You can verify how Logan River Golf Course, Gleneagles, East Bay and Overlake Golf Courses have struggled, by checking with them.
Some of the letters that the Council received were from golf pros.
How do we stop the Mayor from raping Mt. Ogden Golf Course and ultimately Ogden in the end? Does everyone need to call his office and leave him the message: "LEAVE THE GOLF COURSE ALONE!!!" Do we need to do a petition drive? Or booth? We need to move fast before it's too late!
So, Curmudgeon, why aren't you trusting their judgement on Susan Van Hooser? Listening to what she said tonight, I think that she will be a strong, independent member on the Council, but one who will have all the Council working together for the best good of Ogden -- not the Mayor.
Can't we get rid of Godfrey before he completely ruins the golf course and the mountainside? How does he come up with all these dark, insidious schemes? Does he have the Devil's Little Black Book of Evil Doers?
Call his office and complain about what he's doing to the golf course - 629-8111. IF IT AIN'T BROKE, LEAVE IT ALONE!!
At least one menber of the Planning Commission told me, "The golf course is well maintained and very affordable."
If that gives Godfrey a stroke, I'll chortle, Curm!
John:
You wrote: So, Curmudgeon, why aren't you trusting their judgement on Susan Van Hooser?
Sorry, but I haven't questioned their judgement. I questioned their violation of their own procedures and their promise [in Mr. Cook's press release on choosing a new member] to make the letters of interest they got from candidates public. [See for example Scott Schwebke's story on that in today's SE [front page of the "Top of Utah" section.]
All I said with respect to our new Councilwoman is that we do not know yet what kind of Councilwoman she will be. I am hopeful she will be an excellent one. But at the moment, she has no record. Optimism, but cautious optimism, seems to be what's called for here.... it's called for on the installation of any new Councilmember by any means. And cautious optimism is what I think I reflected above.
As for the golf course: I am not a golfer so I cannot speak from experience. But it would not suprise me in the least that Hizzonah might try to manipulate management of the course in order to reduce business and generate losses in order to make the Peterson real estate speculation scheme seem more attractive. After all, he has... Ogden's spokesman to the world who is supposed to promote the city and its attractions... announced the course to be "unfriendly" to golfers on several occasions. And yet people continue to play it, both residents of Ogden and those of surrounding communities. Imagine that.
Holy crap...don't you get it, the fix WAS in, IT WAS HER.
There was no reason for congrats. It was all set up. There was no surprise. It was all acting. IF the Mayor had been all gracious, he would have been accused of kissing up. Then when the fix starts going his way, everyone would have accused her of answering to him. Express displeasure...then wait and watch.
Like Curmudgeon, I am cautiously optimistic. This morning's article stated that Ms. Van Hooser "pledged to work toward ending divisiveness over controversial projects," and I of course like this, having stated that the biggest issue facing Ogden was separatism and the mindset that issues were always one "side" against another "side."
There are, however, many ways to "end divisiveness," a few being quite negative, like outright war for example, where "sides" attempt to demolish each other. One would hope Ms. Van Hooser would not be in favor of this, since it seems to be what we have now and is also, in my opinion, not an honest picture of the reality of the situation, but is falsely imposed.
I have been thinking a lot about this lately, and have come to the conclusion that what we have seen here in the last couple of years didn't have to happen and it doesn't have to continue. With major projects such as have been proposed, it is normal and natural for people to want to know facts about them, like cost and feasibility, for instance. These things are so basic, and yet we have been given no answers to these questions--"How much will it cost," and, more importantly, "Will this even work?" Instead, those who have asked them have been labeled as being on a "side," which is contrary to the "side" of the administration, therefore enemies, therefore not worthy of consideration or civilized dialogue.
That is what I mean by the climate of divisiveness being falsely imposed. There is a distinct lack of willingness to discuss certain aspects of these projects and instead a tendency to label those who wish to discuss them as being hostile. That's it in a nutshell.
This morning's article stated that Ms. Van Hooser is a retired schoolteacher. I don't think she would have gotten very far in this career if she automatically labled as hostile any student who asked a question. And this is why I am cautiously optimistic. Perhaps we will finally be able to achieve some honest dialogue on these issues, in which questions are asked and solutions explored and this process will lead to the right decisions being made.
If not, the schism present in our community will continue to widen, and the notion of "sides," initially falsely imposed, will become our reality. Which unfortunately may be what some people want and what they have been working toward since the inception of all this. If that happens, it happens. But it is not, even at this late date, unavoidable.
Common courtesy, for instance, can go a long way toward ending divisiveness. Really wish I could have been there last night to see who exibited it. And who didn't.
Obvious, you're full of crap! You don't know squat! Please don't give anyone a chance! I'm sure glad I don't know you personally, because I'd be blinded by your dazzling optimism! You and the Godfrey should quit lying and just try to make it honestly.
Dear Obvious:
I suspect what you're doing is satirizing the handful of real conspiracy buffs who post here occaionally. The really nice thing about seeing conspiracies under every bed and behind every tree is that no matter what happens, it ends up being proof that the conspiracy exists. Had the Council chosen the former airport manager last night, I have no doubt the conspiracy buffs this morning would be telling us "See! I was right! The fix was in!" But the Council chose someone else, and suddenly that becames, for the conspiracy buffs, evidence that the fix was in. Had they been unable to reach a decsion last night, I have not doubt this morning we'd be hearing "Ha! Now we know the truth! Godfrey needed more time to put the fix in so his lackeys on the Council prevented a majority to give it to him!"
It's gettin' kind of old. I wish the conspiracy crowd would give it a rest. At least for a while.
Why is Little Matty Godfrey spending city time and money by "hiring" Earl Kemp to ruin Mt. Ogden Golf Course when its sale is by no means a done deal? Why is Little Matty constantly huddling with Curt Geiger regarding all matters that aren't necessarily related to the silly gondola to nowhere? Can Bob Geiger fractionally explain these things to me?
Mrs. Van Hooser will make a fine addition to the commission. I know she has volunteered on other commissions in Ogden in the past, such as the Ogden City Landmarks Commission, and was a well-respected teacher and from what I've heard she has been very level headed and did a great job. It appears to me the Council made the correct choice. If it is true as previously mentioned that the Mayor did not congratulate or acknowledge her, then it's a real shame.
Curmudgeon
Are you saying that the "conspiracy" theories abounding around the Godfrey administration are without merit?
Seems to me that a considerable amount of your posts herein feed these theories.
Do you really believe in and trust that little bastard?
lol....yes, that was satire. But only if you are not paranoid.
My point is that people will see whatever they want to see and if Godfrey had been all chummy they would have been critical of his ass kissing.
I don't know whether he was appropriate or not, but I do know that he would have been attacked either way...with or without merit.
But, just to be clear, it matters not to me.
ned:
I said those who see conspiracies behind everything are over the top and their claims cannot be taken seriously. Those who see Godfrey behind everything the Council does or does not do, and who find hidden meanings [often highly improbable] in everything he says, seem to me to have let their animus to him overcome their judgement.
Hard put to think of posts I've put up that would "feed" conspiracy theories in re: the Mayor. I've put up posts questioning his judgement and his woefully weak grasp on what constitutes ethical conduct in a public official. All of which I think I can sustain on the evidence.
What, exactly, did you have in mind? Certainly not, for example, his nomination of Mr. Chapman for the Planning Commission. That a Mayor would nominate people he believes will support his proposals hardly constitutes a "conspiracy" claim. We'd have to be nieve beyond belief to expect a mayor --- any mayor --- to do otherwise.
Conspiracy buffs find nefarious motives and manipulation where there is no evidence to support those claims. You won't, I think, find such claim among my posts.
You ask if I "really believe in and trust" him. Not much. He disembles in public and is disengenuous. I have little trust in his judgement on many matters, and [based on his performance in office], little in his integrity as a public official. But so long as I can offer evidence to support such conclusions --- evidence meaning fact, illustration, and example --- I don't think I'm among the conspiracy buffs.
My view is, we [the citizenry in general] should approach the statements, claims and proposals of all elected officials with a skeptical eye and questioning mind, and take nothing from them on faith. They have a program they want the city to adopt? Fine. We need to ask them to prove to us that it's a good one, that it will do what they say it will do, that the costs have been accurately estimated, that it is feasible, and so on. All programs. From all officials. If a Mayor [or representative or senator or councilman] can do that, fine. I'm with him. If not, then whatever he's proposing should not go forward. Regardless of who the proposer is.
Should I decide to support a candidate for Mayor and should the voters be wise enough to elect my choice to the office, I'll be [and have been, elsewhere] just as demanding, just as questioning, just as skeptical of whatever he or she endorses once in office.
All of us should be. All the time. We elect men and women to office, after all. Not little plaster saints.
I think the one thing that remains perfectly clear is the fact that real problem here is Godfrey. I know people on both sides of the issues that agree on one thing. It is not so much about what he wants to do, it is the way that he does it.
First let me state that his behavior like "Kingfish" Huey Long, only brings our the conspiracy theorys. All the back room deals, the pay offs to people like Stuart Reid, the removal of funding for Union Station, ticket quotas for cops, keeping the Fire Department under staffed, violations of Constitutional Rights, i.e. Bruce Edwards and the recent "Van Scandal", illegal moving of RDA funds around, Earnst Health deal, $2.5 Million Wal-Mart Marshall White Center, using $2 Million dollars of Utah State Grant money to build a parking garage when that money was supposted to be for fixing up the American Can Company building, etc, etc, etc.
If Godfrey would acknowledge that there are other points of views; provide verifable facts, figures and analysis; and at least act like he cares about Ogden then some people might give him the benefit of doubt.
But it will only go on untill 1/1/08. Just wait for the surprises he has for us as a lame duck mayor. There finally is an awaking in Utah that elected officials can not be held responsible for what they do. Other cities and counties are facing this problem and it is finally being talked about. But as long as Utah does not have a re-call law there is noting short of Lee Harvey Oswald that we can do about it. This is a state wide issue that REQUIRES A VOTER INITATIVE. Unfortunately Elected Officials in Utah still have us firmly trapped in 1847.
I cannot believe that Bishop Godfrey is as respected in his church as he is. For all his public actions/behavior are against what I understand to be who "Good Mormons" are suppost to be. This is partly why the Ogden Substandard Exaggerator no longer prints anything that Godfrey does not approve. This from a newspaper that claims it wants access to public records, yet will not provide the citizens of Ogden with truthfull in depth reporting of Godfreys' dictatorship. How much cash under the table does Scott LIEwebke get for only presenting Godfreys' side of the story. What kind of "Blackmail" pressure do the Godferyites have on the publisher and editorial staff of the Exaggerator to prevent them from publishing the truth?
Yes the conspiricy theories abound. When there is no honest, factual reporting to contradict the propaganda, there is nothing
available to stop these theories.
UTAH NEEDS A RE-CALL LAW! GG2G
We heard a lot of platitudes last week and last night. Lots of , "I love people! I love to talk to people and listen!!"
Asked by Safsten , 'what will you do to bring in economic development?'....What an inane question. Like ONE CC member is responsible for economic development. Isn't that what we have Bill Glasmann for??
I wish someone would have said..."And what have YOU done to help Ogden?"
"I love Ogden. I love people. I think it's important to ask the people what they want (gondola)."
How naive is that? As if asking people who have no clue what that goofy plan is about (like the rest of us) really matters. That's Godfrey's style. Ask a bunch of ignorant (of facts, cuz there ain't none) persons what they LIKE and then tell us the 'people have spoken'.
Duh. I hope Mrs. Van Hooser will be a welcome addition to the CC. If so, thank Bill Glasmann.
I know nothing about Susan Van Hooser but I loved the hell out of her answers!
Also, exactly when (assuming it is true) did the redesign of the golf course come up?? Two questions: Is it true and, if so, is this yet another action over which the council has no control??
The "gentlefolk" contributors to the Forum have reached a new low.
This from ex-humbug ...
"But as long as Utah does not have a re-call law there is noting short of Lee Harvey Oswald that we can do about it."
Doesn't it make you proud?
anonymous - DO NOT judge us all by that IDIOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
sorry...I meant to say MORON - not idiot.
Oh, everyone take a deep breath, please.
"Obvious" was being funny when he made that crack about Van Hooser being the 'fix.' What has happened to this forum? Since when do we have so many numbskulls (oh, sorry...I meant idiots...oh, I meant morons) taking umbrage. Some of us told it like it was last night with the incredibly bad manners displayed by our leader and right away Curm has to do the apologist's dance: "Well, I can't say it didn't happen, but I didn't see it myself"...paraphrased...but the meaning is the same.
Take all your anger out at the one who deserves it. Go to Union Station tonight and tell Godfrey what you think of him, just in case he missed this thread.
Little Matty Godfrey is not taking questions at tonight's "forum," the purpose of which is beyond me. He will be striding in when his call-in show ends, and he will be repeating his silly gondola lies to people who no longer believe them. Little Matty may or may not express his love and lust for Frump Peterson at this time, but he will most certainly lie about Frump's $500 million "investment" in Ogden. Bob Geiger can likely provide you with a fractional analysis of this "investment," including how much Peterson plans to "invest" on magical dwarves who will guard the Tyrolean castle with their gondola-imbued superpowers.
Sharon: I can vouch for your original observations re Mad Matt.
I watched his body language front to end during last night's event. Whereas he was leaning forward in his seat, applauding and wearing his adolescent "angelic smile" during my new bar room buddy Admiral Taylor's perfomance, he skulked down in his seat with most of the other candidates' "performances."
Boss Godfrey grew absolutely catatonic when Mrs. Van Hoosen was unanimously selected. This was NOT an act.
Godfrey has NO POKER FACE.
He displays all the "tells" of an adolescent.
you people are funny.....and a few, well, are scary.
I think I will dress as the Weber County Forum for Halloween.
The Truth scares the hell outta ya, doesn't it, eh anonymous?
The Std-Ex is bought and paid for.
What you're reading here is the pulse of the Emerald City Townsfolke.
Pretty scary for Godfreyites, innit?
"Scary" is exactly the right word. We hope for your sake you don't get caught up in the inevitable litigation and indictments.
And, what do you give the one who 'takes the cake'?
You will be dressed in style, dear.
Thanx for the credibility back-up, Rudi.
See when you say things like:
"The Std-Ex is bought and paid for."
The credibility is quickly lost. It shows tht you have no idea how the newspaper really works. And then make me question you ability to accurately assess how anything work.
Litigation? Not me.
In fact, I'm not on the side of either one of these positions, but I'm scared by ignorance and so yes, I'm very scared.
I saw it with my own two eye balls. The Little Lord definately was not a happy camper after the Van Hooser name was spoken.
I thought about the implications of this. Could she be one of his ringers, and he was putting on an act? Perhaps, but I just don't think the guy is an actor. Pretender yes, but I'm with Rudi on this one, he was wearing his emotion on his sleeve, I don't think he was acting. Acting would mean that he needed to portray something besides the real him. His hubris is such that he could never think that the real him was not suffient for the occasion and superior to any other in the room.
He was beaming with the Admiral's masterful performance, and he was mostly skulking during most of the other's. He did perk up a couple of times when the candidates said something that stirred his little NeoCon soul. But other than that he, as well as his bestes buddy Curt Geiger, were stony faced.
So I think if the Little Lord was going to be acting, he would have started his performance at the beginning and carried it all the way through to the end. In others words he wouldn't have shown disinterest for the candidates during their performances and then put his acting hat on only at the outcome. But then with this little dude you just never know.
I also think that if one of his ringers had won, his massive ego would not have been repressed. He would be pleased as punch for this very important win, especially after the Prisbrey and Chapman imbarrasment, to say nothing of the still pending Matt Jones civil rights fiasco. But then again you just never know with sociopathic personalities.
I find some comfort from Councilwoman Van Hooser's background. Hey, my mom was a school teacher. I hope the first lesson that she administers is to the council on just what their position is in the great pecking order of Ogden city government. Are they the Little Lords door matt, or are they the independent legislative body with parrallel and equal power? Are they the guardians of the tresury or are they not?
If she is completely unbiased one way or the other on the Elephant in the Living Room, if she weighs all factors pro and con on the big "G", then I think she will make a wise vote on the matter. On the other hand if she succumbs to the Little Lord's incredibly incessant and disingenuous lobbying attacks, then it is very possible that she could be just one more of the little fella's building blocks.
I of course am quite confident that if any reasonable, and reasonably intelligent person, weighs out all of the elements of this Peterson proposal they will come to the conclusion that it is total bull crap from its very core to all of its ugly tenacles. None of it really makes economic, social or enviromental sense. The only way it works is if the taxpayers of Ogden pony up with open wallets for years and years into the future.
So I saw the LL's pout last night just like some of these other lunatics. The little fella and his buddy Curt were not very pleased. They both had very dour looks for most of the evening. Course now Geiger always looks a bit grumpy like somethings crawlin around in his Descent thermal underwear. It was also interesting how Geiger went up and leaned waaaaay over the front of the little guy's desk, got his lips 2 inches away from Matt's ear and whispered some thing, most likely condolences. The LL had not moved in his chair for a very long time after the appointment and the council adjourned. It looked like he needed a friend for quite a while till Geiger came up and hovered over him.
When Jesse announced Mrs. Van Hooser's name, Sharron Beach and that trouble maker from Farmington initiated a loud clapping that quickly spread to a standing ovation in the Chamber. Something you very rarely see happen in that hallowed hall. Jesse, Stevenson and Safsten at first looked alarmed and upset but very quickly joined into the spirit when the tide spread across the room. Meanwhile the poor little fella had a look of disgust on his face and you could see him seething at this standing ovation. No indeed, he did not like it one bit. Unless of course the little bounder was acting!
One thing I can tell you also is that the Lord Mayor did very much enjoy and react to the Admiral's performance. It was hard not to as the guy is very bright, incredibly experienced, supremely confident, and has the performance art down pat. In addition I believe he is way to "big" for this particular pond. If he got in this administration he would have all these empty suits jacket up against the wall, standing tall in spit shined shoes and saying in unison "yes sir, no sir, sir". No way Safsten would let a guy like that on the council if he could prevent it. Jesse too. This guy would eat them both for breakfast!
Although I really liked the Admiral, he is one scary SOB politically. As the Little Lord sat beaming at him he explained his basic out look on society and what the problem politically was as he saw it. He sees the population split into three more or less equal groups. First and fore most is the initiators, the leaders and good guys. Second there is the questioners and non automatic followers, these are the bad guys. Last there is the ones in the middle that don't lead or follow or ask questions, they are the civilians. He sees the role of the good guys is to focus on the middle ground civilians, pasify them, sell them your vision, and sway them to join in attacking and defeating the bad guys. With these military guys there always has to be an enemy to conquer.
I think the Admiral is very admirable and also the very reason that military minds usually do not make good nor desireable politcians.
All in all I think the choice of Mrs. Van Hooser was the very best we could have and I am hopefull that she is and stays her own person.
Those of you who were fortunate enough to be able to attend (last night) should have had consideration for those of us who were unable to attend. You could at least have taken your cam-corders to record the mayor's expressions. That way we could have all enjoyed the moment. ;)
PS; I just know there are some of you who will take this seriously. It was tongue in cheek.
On the other hand, maybe it waas nto a bad idea.........
"The credibility is quickly lost."
No it's not.
The Std-Ex has zero credibility in Ogden city.
Even people who technically rely on Std-Ex info hedge their statements with a disclaimer:
"Of course, I got this "information" from the "Standard-Examiner."
hahahaha!
I am trying to figure out how this particular topic turned into an SE bashing opportunity. Some points to consider:
The SE highlighted the news that it had requested the letters from the Fab Five, that it was refused them by the city, that it filed a GRAMA request for them and was refused. And then did a follow up story noting that the Council had violated its own announced procedures in denying the paper [and public] the letters, and named the councilpersons responsible.
On this particular issue, I don't think they dropped the ball. I have problems with some of their other coverage [I think they got played, not paid, on the Schewbke Accompanies The Godfrey Gondola Sales Team stories, for example, and the current moratorium on gondola/Peterson project letters is indefensible, particularly if, as has been rumored, it was put on at the request of the mayor.]
But it is the home town paper. It is the source of most news for Ogden. And it doesn't drop the ball all the time.
Whomp 'em when they screw up, but blanket announcements that the staff is all on the take, they get nothing right, etc. are not sustainable on the evidence, and [for me] just undercut the credibility of whoever is making the blanket charge.
Well I got to agree with you Curmudgeon on the Standard. But come on man, you got to admit they are an embarrassment to the fourth estate. They couldn't hold the jock of a really good news paper.
Sometimes they get stuff right, seems to be a random deal however. They do the local community special interest stuff ok most of the time, they cover the car wrecks and shoot em ups, once in awhile Porter or some one in his crew comes up with a very good editorial, their cartoonist is world class, and Trentelman is very good with his feature piece. But on balance and especially in their hard hitting political news reporting they are on the low down. There is absolutely no effort to investigate any bit of propoganda the wanna be developers and political hacks lay on them. Their local reporter might as well be writing the obituaries where his natural lack of inquisitiveness would fit in. You never have to question the accuracy of a dead man's life outline as told by the grieving widow to the mortuary clerk.
The problem is that the paper is run by a bunch of bean counters AKA "The Suits of Sandusky". Their main motive is extracting as much cash out of Ogden and back to Ohio as they possibly can. There is only three old timers in the whole damn place that still have any ink in their veins. It is all about money, not about informing the public.
If the Tribune or the DNews decided to make a beach head in Northern Utah the Standard would fold within one year.
Let us pray that one of those real news papers sees this opportunity and siezes it. If you like the idea then email Nancy Conway at the Trib, and God at the DNews and tell em about it.
Ogden has traditionally had a great news paper in the Ogden Standard Examiner. We deserve a good strong paper and in this particularly dangerous financial time we desperately need one. The citizens of Ogden are not getting the whole truth about this Gondola proposal, just like they didn't get the truth about the Mall, and just like they didn't and don't get the truth about all the rest of Godfrey's loser projects. They don't get the whole truth from the politicians and they aint getting it from the Standard.
What the hell is a paper good for if it isn't to get a little taste of the truth from now and again?
Armysarge and Annomious, Thank you for your comments on my personality. You are both much to kind. You place me on a pedistal above you and I don't think you should put yourselves down like that.
I put stuff like "Lee Harvey Oswald" in my comments just to see if ANYONE actually reads what I type. If I raised your blood pressure then I have been successful in making my point(s).
But hey folks, Annomyous (DC) and armysarge are at least willing to participate. Now how do we get the Substandard Exaggerator to do the same. Would a large cash donation under the table to Scott LIEwebke change his perspective?
No matter what else transpires before I leave for the Celestial Kingdom I hope to see a RE-CALL LAW on the Utah State books. GG2G
Ozboy:
No argument that the SE is not what it could be as a newspaper, and not what it ought to be, particularly with respect to municipal reporting [and not just Ogden].
It does not do much investigative reporting, but that is a very expensive proposition and it may not be financially feasible for it to do much. And it is also true that newspapers nationwide are losing readers and struggling to make ends meet. So they --- all dailys --- have bottom line problems they have to take into account. The SE is not a charitable organization. It's for profit.
That said, I think you put your finger on its greatest weakness: a truly puzzling [to me] lack of curiousity and unwillingness to look beyond the press release or PR statement, particularly of elected officials. They are satisfied committing press release journalism far too often. Seems to me that can be traced to the news editors who seem not to expect, or require, much by way of probing questions from their reporters.
Ogden needs... hell, all cities need... a good, independent paper that, as a matter of policy, looks with a gimlet eye upon all pronouncements by elected officials and bodies, and that takes with a grain of salt all claims by committed advocates of both sides when a controversial public matter is involved. And that as a matter of course asks folks to back up what they claim. "Mr. Mayor, what do you base that claim on?" and "Councilwoman Wicks, what is your source for that statement?" and "Mr. Geiger, do you have numbers to back that statement up?" --- All those questions should be standard equipment for all reporters at the SE. And when one files a story which makes it plain the reporter has not asked those questions, editors it seems to me ought to want to know why they weren't asked. And when they will be.
I suspect many decades from now, when archeologists and historians are trying to describe why the US declined and fell, finally, they may well date the start of the fall to the last two decades when most American mid-sized cities that used to have two papers lost one, and became one newspaper towns. Ending the often heated, and very healthy, competition between them to cover politics and public affairs better than their rival.
As you note, the SE does some things well. And I am very glad it printed Mr. Wilson's informal feasibility analysis of Malan's Basin as a ski venue --- and matched it with one of Hizzonah's disengenuous fact-free screeds. Very glad. But there is room for lots of improvement in the news columns and the paper needs to display a great deal more independence there than it has of late.
Comment promoted by administrator to main article, along with subsequent relevant reader comments.
New comments are not allowed.