Friday, September 08, 2006

Something Up With Which We Should NOT Put*

By Dian Woodhouse

With *apologies to the Late Winston Churchill, this may be...

Something Up With Which We Should NOT Put.

Around Labor Day weekend, certain selected residents of 23rd Street received the following letter, on letterhead, from the Office of the Mayor, Ogden City:

August 29, 2006

Dear [23rd street addressees],

There has been a lot of discussion about a gondola system and resort coming to Ogden. The proposed route of the gondola goes up 23rd Street. Because this will have an effect on your property, I would like to meet with you to discuss the proposal, receive your feedback and answer any questions you may have.

The meeting is scheduled for September 5th at 5:00 p.m. in my office at 2549 Washington Boulevard, 9th floor. Please call Christy at 629-8211 to confirm your attendance.

Thank you for your interest.

Sincerely,

Matthew R. Godfrey
Mayor of Ogden

Of course, neighborhoods being what they are, there was one resident who heard about this meeting and who had not received notice of it, and who then subsequently found that this was intentional. Small, selected groups of people were asked, by invitation only, to meet on the ninth floor. Some were included, some were excluded. It is said that there are to be more meetings, with different selected groups of 23rd Street neighbors, in the future.

At least one resident who wishes to remain anonymous and who did attend this September 5th meeting does not wish the gondola to go up 23rd Street, but the process, it seems, has progressed way beyond whether people do or do not want the gondola. According to this source, the meeting with the Mayor included particulars about where the gondola will go and what will happen.

For instance, our source states from the information given by the Mayor at this meeting that the poles will be 35 feet high and placed roughly 375 feet apart. They will go directly up the center of the street, erupting (my word) from a median which will be landscaped, thereby adding to the "attractiveness of the neighborhood," (purportedly the Mayor's words.)

A cherry picker, (coincidentally, "cherry picking" was the term used by at least one person to describe the selection process for attendees at these meetings,) will be brought in so that neighbors can ride up on it and actually see how high the cars will be. More trees will be planted, in an effort to give these neighbors privacy from riders of the gondola, our source reports.

Our source further informed us that, after listening to a bit of this, someone asked if the gondola were really going in, then, and that the Mayor allegedly replied that all they were waiting for was the Forest Service, which would allow it to go to the top of the mountain. And when someone stated that property values under the gondola would decline, the reported response to this was that they would increase, and that he wished it were running through his yard. Its operating hours will be roughly from 7 AM to 10 PM.

Our source went on to say that someone brought up the possibility that people would not wish to park at the Intermodal Hub, and would instead park in front of the residences on 23rd Street. The Mayor's reported answer to this was that parking permits, to park on the street in front of their houses, would be issued to the residents. The presentation, the source reported, also focused in large part about how great the skiing in Malan's Basin was going to be, since it was north facing.

After the meeting, our source reports, one of the neighbors said, "Well, we'd better get used to it."

Very odd, this. Very odd indeed. What has happened to the painstaking process for approval of this project outlined in the "Discovery Ogden" document, upon which Council and City Hall staff have worked themselves to the bone this past month? What has happened to the required public hearings, public processes, the input and decision from Weber State University, whose land, it was stated earlier this year, is absolutely crucial to this project? In short, what has happened to the mandated processes required to perform all steps necessary for this project to even reach the table? Has the Council signed the requested "pre-development agreement" granting the No-Zone Zone? Is it really true that all that is keeping the project from moving ahead is the permission of the Forest Service for access to the top of the mountain?

One would prefer to answer those last two questions with the word "no," and proceed to smooth things over with conciliatory statements as to how the process, which was mandated by the Ogden City Council, is still in place and will be followed. Yet for some of these neighbors, who do not keep up on these issues, and who, upon hearing the presentation about what was going to happen in their neighborhood, the inescapable conclusion was that they'd "better get used to it."

If events in this meeting actually did take place as indicated by our source, and if the alleged statements made by the Mayor during it are true, this is not to be borne. The public has received information indicating that a process will be followed in making the decision as to whether or not to even do this project, and these neighbors are being told basically that it is moving ahead, that there will be flowers in the median, parking permits, more trees, 35 foot poles every 375 feet, operating hours of 7 AM to 10 PM, and that that is their future.

Which is it?

45 comments:

Anonymous said...

First I've heard of this, Dian. Thank you for the heads up.

I wonder if anyone at the meeting inquired of the Mayor on what grounds he predicts that residential property values under the gondola will go up if it goes in? It would be very interesting to know that. But of course, that means asking questions, and we all know that asking questions about the Mayor's pipe deams means you are merely a "naysayer" who is "against everything and for nothing" and probably know at least tow people with SmartGrowthOgden signs in their yards on a first name basis. Which means of course that your questions are irrelevent and your opinions don't matter.

Have you passed on any of this to the SE and SL Trib? Are any of the people who you talked to willing to be interviewed by the SE and/or the Trib?

For the Forest Service to approve building Mr. Peterson's mountain gondola to the ridgle line above Malan's Basin would require it, I think, to amend its current and relatively new Forest Plan. That is an public process and the steps involved in it are, I believe, are matters of public record. Has anyone asked the FS if it has received a request to amend its Forest Plan to accommodate Mr. Peterson's plans? Are copies of the request available [if it exists]? Have you suggested the SE and SLT need to begin looking into this?

Finally, I hope you forward the sections of your post involving the Mayor stating that the ONLY thing holding up actual building of the gondola is the wait for FS approval of the mountain leg to the rigde to all the members of the planning commission and the City Council. I imagine they might interested to know that the Mayor considers their views, their votes, and their fulfilling their obligations as appointed Commissioners and elected Councilmembers to be irrelevent to the approval of the Peterson real estate specualtion scheme [sale of the Mt. Ogden parklands] and the Mayor's gondola/gondola scheme. Remember, to this point no proposal has been submitted, so far as we know, to either the PC or the Council by Mr. Peterson or by the Mayor's office.

The more light we can focus on the Mayor's back door activities in support of his buddy's real estate speculation scheme based on his buying as open space Ogden's biggest park, the more trouble he is going to have foisting if off on the citizens of Ogden. We need the press to get busy on this. Let's hope they don't drop the ball.

Anonymous said...

Well, you know the dumb little dissembling bastard would much rather tell a lie than the truth. Hell, he would lie even if the truth were better!

Anonymous said...

Curmudgeon,

One of the people I spoke with has already written letters to the press and the council, he/she said. I have a copy of the letter that went out which I have sent to The Blogmeister and which he may archive. These people I spoke with prefer to remain anonymous at present, and I am respecting that, but I do think, especially in view of the letter writing, etc., the one says has already been done, that some are indeed willing to talk to the press.

Regarding the Forest Service bit, I was very taken aback by that and went over it a couple of times to see if I had heard it correctly. I read it back to the person and he/she confirmed it.

(I am speculating from this that there may still be some idea of a link to SnowBasin. Could this be? Are people still being told this, I wonder?)

My personal view is that if even one person left that meeting with the impression that this project is "a done deal," which seems indeed to have occurred, that this is a big problem. Not fair to anyone, really, especially those who are trying diligently to work within the process and trying to make it work.

Anonymous said...

Dian:

Of course they are still suggesting it will connect with Snowbasin. That is still up on the city website. But Snowbasin, very recently again said not interested. Mere weeks ago.

The theory is the mountain end of the gondola will proceed to the top of the ridge above Malan's basin [not onto Snowbasin land], and skiers could, presumably, then ski down the east side of the ridge onto Snowbasin property. How they would get back up to the ridgeline [Snowbasin, again quite recently, said it is not interested in building a lift to the ridgeline from its side, and that it does not regularly groom the east slope where the Malan's Basin Gondola would crest regularly, nor does it do daily avalanche control in that area either.] But Hizzonah understands that having people believe all this will connect downtown with Snowbasin and that hundreds a day will use the gondola to go from downtown to Snowbasin is essential to his selling the plan. That's why the suggestion that the gondola/gondola will relieve hundreds of the need to drive to SnowBasin is still up on the city website. The site does not mention, of course, that taking the proposed city gondola to WSU, then walking to the proposed Peterson Mountain gondola base station, then taking the Peterson gondola to its highest point in Malan's basin [whereever that may turn out to be, depending on whether the FS agrees to revise the Forest Plan], then crossing the ridge onto SnowBasin property would take longer than driving from downtown to Snow Basin, and cost considerably more. [City gondola fare plus mountain gondola lift ticket vs. gas cost of driving.]

There are, sadly, many who believe the gondola is a "done deal" and they are not just residents of 23 Street who have been to Mayoral soirees. Some weeks ago, I overheard people coming up to the Sierra Club table at the Farmers' Market, and seeing streetcar brochures there, who then said "Why are you still passing this stuff out? Hasn't the city already decided to build the gondola? Hasn't the Council already approved it?" They were surprised when the Sierra Club folk told them no, that not only had "the city" not approved the plan, but that no proposal had yet been made by Peterson or the Mayor to either the planning commission or the Council. Their reply: "You should let people know this. Our friends told us this has already been decided."

Utah Peaknik said...

I'm sure the mayor thought to himself: "Hey, we can have the gondola go up 23rd and down Harrison, because most of those houses are either run-down or just rental properties anyway." I say that if we get a gondola, it should jog up 25th from Harrison, south on Tyler past the mayor's house, and then back down 26th to Harrison. If the mayor insists that a gondola would raise property values on 23rd street, maybe he should put some money where his mouth is and buy a rental on 23rd. After all, if the property values there will increase, wouldn't the mayor want to benefit from it?

OgdenLover said...

Dian for City Council!

Anonymous said...

Hey Peaknik,
you ask this question?
If the mayor insists that a gondola would raise property values on 23rd street, maybe he should put some money where his mouth is and buy a rental on 23rd. After all, if the property values there will increase, wouldn't the mayor want to benefit from it? How many of you know that the mayor does own property on 23rd street and that is why he wants it to go up 23rd street. I would hope that someone would ask the little mayor which of the properties are his?

Anonymous said...

I am amazed that these meetings are still going on.

Of course, I suppose I shouldn't be.

But it wasn't too long ago, one week ago today to be exact, that the Standard Examiner editorial appeared in response, one would imagine, to the Mayor's press release about Smart Growth refusing to take down its yard signs. About how we all "fight" too much. And intentional or not, one thing that could said to have been implied by this was that Smart Growth was being the bad guy by refusing to remove its signs, as if Smart Growth was refusing to, as one of my friends used to put it, "join hands and sing "Kumbaya.'"

With the completion of the Council's process for this project, "Discovery Ogden," a nicely detailed and cogent document, laying out the steps as it did one by one, it did seem that perhaps things gondola related were reaching a level of normalcy. That this process, now made official, would be respected and allowed to play itself out.

Insofar as I know, the Council still does not have a proposal. I believe what it has is a request to sign the pre-development agreement which will create the No-Zone zone.

And now this. Tidbits which obviously come from a proposal, including hours of operation, landscaping of the median, etc. Information which has been released to a select few residents of 23rd Street as if all this has already been decided upon.

Well. Here are the Lyrics to Kumbaya, in case we should all decide to join cyber hands and sing.

OgdenLover said...

Assuming that it can be proven that the Mayor does own property on 23rd street (and this is not the first time I've heard that allegation), do we have to wait until a gondola is actually built there before he can be indicted for conflict of interest?

I've been told that the only way to remove little Matt from office was to have him found guilty of a felony. Isn't such a blatant conflict of interest illegal here?

And, once again, City facilities (letterhead, office facilities and probably staff and postage, i.e. our tax dollars) are being used to promote what is still an unapproved, unsubmitted "proposal" from a private individual.

Anonymous said...

Mono:

Odd, but I attended one of those "random phone selection" evenings, and wouldn't ya know it, two Geigers seem to have been randomly selected for the session I attended too. And Mrs. Curmdgeon went to another session, and guess what? At least one Geiger had been randomly selected for that one as well. Imagine that.

At my meeting, I got, from Mr. Bob Geiger [I learned who he was subsequently; I didn't know him at the time], a different explanation of why property values would rise on 23 Street, in fact all along the gondola route in Ogden. Ski chalets located along gondola lift lines at major resorts like Aspen, he told me, cost more than chalets located away from the gondola lift lines. Therefore, residential properties next to the gondola line would rise in value compared to homes located further away.

Of course, the ski resort chalets and villas were ski-in, ski-out resort properties. What made proximity to the gondola lifts more valuble was that owners could ski from their lift side chalets down to the lift base, ride it up, and ski back down later in the day to their villas. Somehow, I don't think the residential properties along 23rd Street will be in the same circumstance. [I know, I know, I'm just a naysayer.]

At the session I attended, quite polite queries were greeted with derision or condescension too. Hizzonah had been pitching how auto emissions would be reduced because people would hop the gondola to Snow Basin rather than drive around. One woman, politely, asked the Mayor if, to be fair, he shouldn't add into his calculation the additional emissions created in Ogden daily by the cars of the 400 Vacation Villa owners of the homes Peterson wants to build on the Mt. Ogden parklands. The Mayor immediatly branded her "a naysayer." She was pretty annoyed about that after the meeting when I chatted with her in a parking lot. I didn't blame her.

Interesting to see that Hizzonah was not just having a bad night the evening I was there, that belittling and stigmatizing anyone who dared to ask, however politely, a serious question was part of the plan for your meeting as well. [To be fair, there were hostile questions asked, and some were asked beligerantly. I have no problem with the mayor having replied derisively to them. It's his replying to what I thought were fair questions civilly put with scoffing derision, or permitting the Geigers to reply to them that way, unimpeded, that got my goat.]

Anonymous said...

I'm dizzy from this new, but not surprising, sneak attack by the mayor.

Thank you, Dian, for bringing this to our attention. I hope you and the residents of 23rd street have contacted the TV stations and newspapers?? I hope the affected parties will go on camera and TALK!!

Why did the mayor say that the skiing is good at Malan's which "faces NORTH"??

Dissembling...no outright lying..and nary a blush. Were Ed and the Geiger's at these meetings also?

Mark DiCaria needs to be investigating more than the evil he and Griener have perpetrated on Matt Jones. Should the legislature be looking into the misuse of city employees, letterhead, mailings, and meetings IN the mayor's office??

I wonder if this flap over Dustin Chapman was orchestrated to get our minds off the little sneak's nefarious backroom deals? Now he'll be putting forward others that are going to be unpalatable to many...is this another ploy to keep us busy while he skulks around doing his dirty deeds?

Instead of Kumbaya...we should be doing several bars of "We got TROUBLE...."!

Anonymous said...

I believe an indictment of the Mayor would temporarily remove him from office until the case was adjudicated. He can be removed permantly if he were to be convicted of "high crimes and misdameanors" what ever that means.

We can hope for something like that, but most likely we will have to wait fourteen more months until Nov 07 to shed ourselves of this arrogant abomination.

Unfortunately we do not have a recal law in Utah and there are no persons of power or legal authority in our local culture that has the integrity or political will to take action against Godfrey. In any other state he would most likely already have been indicted and convicted.

I believe that in our Mormon culture, where leaders are annointed by God and are infallible, that so called leaders are loath to criticize each other. The reason would be that they do not want to impeach or show the imperfections of each other for fear of diminishing the respect and power the people here place in the leaders.

If any leader is shown to be less that perfect then the possibility exists that people will think that other leaders might also be flawed thus diminishing them all.

Besides, sheep never challenge the sheep dogs, do they?

Anonymous said...

PS I attended one of the dog and pony shows by invitation...the night the mayor walked out on the cops just as their rep got up to speak and Tom Owens lambasted the mayor for doing so.
I too witnessed anyone who dared to question getting the derisive and sneering reply, if any, or his faithful followers, the Ballantyne's, barking the answers over their shoulders to many in the audience.
Many of the same LO people who attended Godfrey and Peterson's 'private mettings' were at this one. Ed Allen sat in front of me. (We walked into the 'private LO meeting, as did many others so Ed Allen said, "we've decided to make this an open meeting.") Then he asked everyone in the room to introduce themselves. Many builders, loan officers, bankers, real estate agents and brokers, etc. made up the bulk of the audience. With so many 'supporters' in attendance to convince the 'naysayers' that this was Ogden's golden opportunity in which we must BELIEVE so we could have the golden glow too; reminded me of a kid dragging home a stray dog on a rope, "But, mom, he FOLLOWED me. Don't you believe me?"

Anonymous said...

OzBoy, your first three paragraphs make sense, and you are probably correct about the difficulty of removing this arrogant 'abomination' from office.

But you are waaay off base with your remarks about the LDS Church. The Church does not harbor criminals to save face.

When one is breaking the law, civil, moral or a criminal act...there are consequences. But, you know that already.

Members are interviewed regularly. Hopefully, Godfrey would answer truthfully about his honesty in his professional dealings. I doubt it though. I really don't think HE ever believes that he is wrong. In my opinion, he is a sociopath. I suppose a claim could be made to his leaders about his actions which fit the categories of violating a law(s)....with proof.

I don't know what your beef is with the Church, but perhaps this is not the forum for you to express your anger or disappointment, which sounds personal, BTW.

Anonymous said...

Reader

You are waaaay off on your take on my opinion of the Church. I did not, and I do not, have a beef with the Church.
I did not say, or imply that "The Church harbors criminals to save face". I was writing about political leaders in Utah, not Church leaders.

However that does not mean that I do not recognize the cross over effect that the Church's teachings about religious leaders have on our opinion of political leaders. Leaders of the Church are "called" by God to serve and as we all know God don't call on folks that don't have the right stuff. We Mormons are trained from a very early age to not question or challenge our leaders.

The seperation of Church and State in Utah is extremely thin as I am sure you are aware of. There are very few persons in political positions of importance in Utah that are not members in good standing in the Church. This incidently does not mean that they are "good Mormons" in anything but appearances. Incidently I do not mean to say that all political leaders in Utah are "bad Mormons", just a whole lot of them.

I also did not mean to imply that the Church was behind any thing nefarious. I am sorry if you took it that way.

I personally think that President Hinckley is one of the greatest of all Americans. I also think that it is very sad that his teachings are not more closely followed by the political leaders of Utah.

Anonymous said...

I'd be hard put to think of a more distracting matter to debate than the role of Mormonism in the gondola and Peterson debates.

Having worked with not a few LDS members [I am not one] on SGO projects... delivering signs, staffing information tables, and other projects] and at the same events with a lot of non-LDS members, seems to me church membership is a completely irrelevent matter.

With respect to the Mayor, what concerns me is his actions in office, not where or how or who he worships on weekends or even if he worships at all. I don't think god has a position on the gondola or on Mr. Peterson's real estate speculation with public park lands proposal or even on who should sit on the planning commission.

If the Mayor's actions in office are proper and his ideas for Ogden are good ones, they are that regardles of whether the Mayor is LDS, Roman Catholic, Baptist, Jewish, Moslim, Hindu, Budhist, Zoroastrian, atheist or agnostic. If his actions in office are improper and his ideas are poor ones, they are so regardless of whether the Mayor is LDS, Roman Catholic, Baptist, Jewish, Moslim, Hindu, Buddhist, Zoroastrian, atheist or agnostic. [Forgive me if I've left anyone's particular religious preference out of the the lists.]

No, we cannot impeach the mayor. Nor, I think, should we be able to. Absent proven criminal conduct in office, elected officials should be permitted to serve out the terms of office to which the people elected them. And so far, I've seen no credible allegations of criminal conduct on the Mayor's part. It's all very well to claim that he must have violated this particular sub paragraph of that particular ordinance if you interpret the words in just the right way. Even if he has, elected officials should not be removed for what the founders called "light and transient causes" or minor and often inadvertant violations. The ordinances are so many and varied and complex, I doubt any of us could serve as mayor for six years without somehow, according to someone's view, violating some minor regulation at some point.

And the remedy for the mayor's lack of integrity, unethical [not illegal] conduct and his embracing wildly speculative wildly expensive projects without [so far] any evidence to support their wisdom, or even feasibility, or probability of success, are [in the short run] lots and lots of daylight shined on his actions in office, and [in the long run] the ballot box. That's not only how the system works, it's how the system ought to work.

Anonymous said...

I agree with EVERYTHING you've said, Curmudgeon. I couldn't have put it better myself.

Membership in THE CHURCH is entirely irrelevant in all Utah political matters, and L.D.S. Brothers and Sisters NEVER cover up their fellow members' transgressions.

We run a completely honest and faithful Christian Beehive here.

>;-)

Anonymous said...

If the Mayor does own property along the proposed 23rd Street gondola route, it might be a good idea for him to disclose that to the Council per 10-3-1308 of the Utah Code, just in case that ownership might be deemed a conflict of interest.

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.


Amended by Chapter 147, 1989 General Session

Anonymous said...

Little Pippi:

I didn't say the LDS church is irrelevent to politics in Utah. Clearly it is not. Where its interests are concerned, it excercises a great deal of influence. [E.g. the liquor laws.] Just as in other areas of the country where other faiths are dominant, they exercise influence [when they can] when their interests are involved.

I'm unaware, however, that the LDS church [statewide or in Ogden] has taken any position on the gondola or Peterson land speculation matters, or that it considers its interests [theological or secular] to be involved. So far as I can tell, and LDS friends say the same, the Church simply doesn't have a dog in this fight. And so bringing the Mayor's relgion into the disussion accomplishes nothing that I can see but to distract folks from the main question of whether the gondola and Peterson land speculation using public parklands are good ideas for Ogden or not.

Anonymous said...

I've had one property owner's view of what took place at the Planning Commission meeting very recently regarding the proposed Mexican Mercado on 24th.

The developers came from California and brought their architect to the meeting who was the source of this information re redoing plans.

The report I got from this Ogden citizen and business man who attended the meeting was that some of the Commission members have no clue about planning and or costs.

Developers came with plans to show the Commission but now the Commission has insisted they redo the plans at great expense to put in trees and green grass.

The big to-do was that they wanted more grass and trees and flowers.

Did anyone else know about this meeting or attend?

Anonymous said...

... bringing the Mayor's relgion into the disussion accomplishes nothing that I can see...

With the utmost respect, Curmudgeon, I don't think Ozboy did this.

Not presuming to speak for him here, but my impression of his remarks was that they were regarding the tendency among people to question or not question the actions of their leaders. Many religions discourage the questioning of the statements and actions of their leaders, and I think what Ozboy was stating was an opinion that, in Utah, this tendency not to question statements or actions of leaders broadens among a large segment of the populace to include political, or secular, leaders as well as religious ones.

Anonymous said...

dian:

OK. If I misread the intent, and it seems I did, my apologies. I have had others tell me that they think there is a greater tendency in Utah to defer to authority, particularly among young people, than there is elsewhere. But those comments were almost always made in re: college students. I had not thought much about that tendency being more broadly spread across the whole community until very recently.

I have heard (and overheard) people talk about the Mayor's religion, and in not kindly terms, and how they think it affects his judgement, actions etc. I suspect I was conflating Oz's post with those remembered comments. I should not have done that. Again, to Oz, apologies.

Anonymous said...

Curmudgeon

You are obviously a pretty bright and wordly guy which is why it is so astounding that you are so naive as it pertains to the current society that you live in.

Perhaps you missed one of the old rules about moving to Utah. To be in tune with what is going on around here you must set your clock back a hundred years.

You have fallen down the rabbit hole and you seem to be unaware that you have done so. I am sure that in time you will come to realize that the Church doesn't have to openly have a dog in the fight for it to influence and control the outcome. After all, the Lord works in mysterious ways, unlike our Little Lord who is so obvious in his machinations.

And if you don't think the Church is involved, how do you explain the recent intervention by Stake President Goff? Incidently, I do not believe that the Church is in support of this Gondola Scheme. For the most part the big time Church leaders in SLC are way to sophisticated business people to sign on to a goof ball schemes like this. My guess is that they are nuetral on this until a real plan is made and all those infernal uncomfortble questions you damn naysayers keep asking are answered with something close to something reasonable.

And thank you Dian, you got what I was trying to say.

Anonymous said...

Dian,

Thanks for exposing the mayor's tactics to daylight!

Just a minor clarification on the current status of the Peterson proposal. The proposed "pre-development agreement" (PDA) would not, by itself, establish the proposed "no-zoning zone" (NZZ; not Peterson's term!). His letter to the city asks that the PDA be in place by August 4 (don't laugh) and that the NZZ be in place by October 31. To establish the NZZ would require a number of steps including (I think) public hearings before both the Planning Commission and the Council. None of these steps have yet taken place, although I believe the Planning Commission has already discussed the possibility of revising the Sensitive Area Overlay Zone ordinance.

However, a PDA could be interpreted as a commitment from the city to consider, and perhaps even approve, the NZZ as well as all subsequent actions (land sales, annexation, plan amendments, rezoning) requested by Peterson. I'm no lawyer, but I suspect that any sort of PDA could serve as the basis of a lawsuit, or at least a credible threat of a lawsuit, if the Council later says no to Peterson. So in this sense, a PDA would be the first step on the slippery slope toward the NZZ (and everything else).

Anonymous said...

Hidden agendas; conspiracies; law breaking; legal ramifications; and so on.

Why is it that I only read of this stuff on this blog?

And usually tossed back and forth by the same bunch, "the gang." HFor hell sakes, there's a football game tonight. Go to that and relax for a moment or two.

Anonymous said...

Oz and Football Fan:

Oz: Well Oz, I don't have nearly enough information [yet] to be making big broad judgements about how people in Utah may be more likely to defer to authority than people in other states. May be so, but I don't know enough about Utahans overall to say. Big generalizations like that can be found, I think in every state about the people of that state. Some news service did a survey a while ago that showed that people in every state in the Union, all fifty of them, are convinced that the worst drivers in the nation are in their own state.

I can say that I've found students in Utah to be noticeably more polite, as a rule, than students in other states I've worked in. Whether that's because they have better manners or because they are trained up to be more deferential to authority, I wouldn't presume to say. Can say that I like it [the politeness, not necessarily the dererence].

But I'll keep my eyes open, keep looking around, talking to people, reading the papers, eavesdropping shamelessly in coffee shoppes and on the city buses [which I ride a lot] and on bustop benches. In time, I imagine, I'll have enough information to have my own opinion on the matter.

Football Fan: couldn't ask for better weather for a home opener, could we? But you're wrong if you think an interest in public matters, and on-line debate about them, means, necessarily, that people aren't also doing other things. I have the Washinton game on the tube right now, and if Mrs. Curmudgeon were not ill, I'd be at the WSU opener today. Hope to be at several WSU games down the line when we get her back on her feet.

And naturally, like all good and true patriotic 'Merkins I am keeping watch on the NY Mets' rapidly diminishing magic number.[Seven last time I checked.] And the Bees' attempts to avoid elimination in the playoffs. And Wisconsin's run for the roses now that the Grand Daddy of 'Em All will not, this year, be forced to take out of conference teams because of the abominable BCS mythical "national championship" game. [Go Badgers!] And naturally, like all good and decent Americans who were well brought up, I will be checking ESPN and the Deuce to see if Notre Dame is losing [please god], and switching the TV to that game if it looks, late, like they will lose. [There are few finer pleasures of a fall afternoon than actually seeing the final moments of a Notre Dame loss, and watching the dejection of that damned leprechaun on the sidelines].

Anonymous said...

So Curm, what if Notre Dame played BYU? Who do you think God would cheer for?
Who would you cheer for?

You are not going to pick up on much Mo talk in a coffee shop incidently! Against the word of wisdom dontcha know!

Being born and raised in Emerald City and a life time member of the MoMo Church, and having traveled extensively and lived for very long times in such pools of sin as LA and NYC, I can tell you first hand that stuff happens way different here than in most civilized places in the world.

There is some passing similarities to the Taliban only with out the blood, and we actually get to look at the women. We are a law abiding people after all, And above all nothing is ever quite as it seems on the surface.

My best advice to you Mr. C. is keep your head on straight and what ever you do don't let the Marmons get ya. We chew up and spit out infidels.

Anonymous said...

We in "UTAH" do not have infidels, they are gentiles. Check the dictionary (Websters)

Anonymous said...

Ogiii

Thanks for the clarification and filling in the details.

Anonymous said...

Oz:

My idea of a perfect college football season is Notre Dame going 0-11. While I tend, where I don't have a strong rooting interest, to favor public schools over private ones, I'd be hard put to think of any circumstance under which I'd pull for Notre Dame. Against any opponent. Maybe if Al Qa'ida fielded a college team. And even then, I'd have to think about it....

Anonymous said...

Curm, you seem to be a rabid Notre Dame hater! Why?
Is it the Catholics?
The Gipper?
The Hunch Back?
Indiana?
Or do you just not like fish?

Anonymous said...

Well, fans, you should have been at Byu today...the game was stopped because of lightening and the rains did pour! The temperature fell about 10 degrees (or so it seemed). After about an hour the teams took the field again for the last 6 minutes of play.
BYU 49...Tulsa 24.
Great game.

I'm glad to hear that the Monroe St project is back on the table. Instead of only a Hispanic Center, I would hope (as others have also expressed) that this could be an "International" Square or Center. How neat would it be to have Polish, German, Mexican, French, etc, etc, foods and shops?
I'd like to see a way to showcase some cultural traditions there from time to time.
BTW Curm, driving up the dugway tonight, the sunset was
spectacular! And we didn't even have to go to the top of Malan's to enjoy it.

Anonymous said...

The 24th/Monroe property holds more potential than any in the central city. Hopefully the developers and the city have the desire to get it right. When I hear that the PC wanted more trees and landscape, that's good, but so rudimentary. Can we see the plans. This property is smack in the center of the densest populated section of the city. Let's hope there is intention to have a diverse shopping experience with a focus on essentials. There will be more pedestrian use of this center than any in the city so it may be interesting to have less emphasis on parking lots and more on a pedestrian experience. It may be wise to integrate this design with the possibility of streetcar service up 25th or 26th, if we could get the "mayor pequeno" to address the future of transit serving the inner city.

Anonymous said...

Tod:

You want streetcars going nearby? You mean merchants and pedestrians won't be drawn to the place by the thrill of watching gondola cars that they cannot get on or off there pass overhead on 23rd street all day long?

You naysayer you!

Anonymous said...

You beat me to it, Curmudgeon. My thought exactly. A fun and wonderful shopping/browsing area one block away from where this massive transportation project that will not stop there is proposed.

Maybe we can take the bus.

Anonymous said...

My thoughts exactly, tod. Perhaps ogden iii could fill us in on whether the conceptual plans are drawn in strip-mall style with parking lots in front, or in pedestrian-friendly style with front doors opening right onto the sidewalks and parking in the rear (and on the street).

Anonymous said...

Ogden iii, thank you for informing us of this. One thing--were I this developer, I would not acquire properties if I were not sure the project would ultimately fly, and I too have heard that the city is not being that big of a help with this. If the developer bought those properties and then found the project wasn't feasible, they would just have to be unloaded while tying up available capital in the meantime, and perhaps this is why they have not acquired them.

I find it unusual that this, being, I believe an RDA area, had its RDA funds taken from it for the rec center, leaving it, I imagine, to just sit there until someone came in and saved it. Now if that was an untrue statement, someone please correct it, but this is my understanding of what happened there. Also my understanding, the developers asked for somewhere around $2.5 million from the city. This is the same amount the city just recently allocated for its River Project, allegedly voting to use the insurance proceeds from the Shupe Williams fire for that, and it occurs to me that that money might have been better spent on this 24th Street project. Was this given to the Ogden City Council/RDA as an option?

Again, thanks for writing about this.

Anonymous said...

WCForum At Work:

Just want to note that this whole discussion on the Hispanic development on 24th and Monroe got started when Just Curious passed on complaints about the PC holding up the work to argue about landscaping. Since then, much information, especially that posted by Ogiii, and some discussion of same from a variety of posters.

Had WC Forum not existed for Just Curious to post his questions about the project on, I for one would know now very little about what is happening with the project because Ogiii's posts, and others, would never have gone up.

Thanks again, Rudi. This is in fact becoming a community forum.

Anonymous said...

Has Boyer blessed this proposed project? If they don't, it aint gonna happen!

The Mall contracts give Boyer veto power over every other RDA project area in the city. So not only does Boyer control what goes into that area, the property tax money from the project will go toward paying off the Mall and High Tech Wreck fiasco's while Boyer gets the lion's share of any money that might be made there.

Does any one know if this is still the Legase project that the Little Lord and his empty suits said no to a few months ago?

Dian - seems to me that these developers should have tied up any key properties with options before they got too far into it. That way they wouldn't end up holding and disposing of properties if it didn't fly. The whole thing could be messed up if there are properties in the middle of it that are not under control. This could then become one of those classic horror stories that eminent domain boosters use as justification for cities taking private property for their develpments. You know, the lone holdouts who highjack the developers for big bucks because their properties are in the path of progress.

It sure would be good for Ogden if this project does happen. That area is desperate for something like this.

Anonymous said...

OzBoy, I think you're correct. I believe Legase is the name of the Project/Developer from several months back who were told to 'hit the road,Juan.'

Wouldn't this be wonderful for Ogden and Weber County, actually? If/when the Junction gets going, one could walk or ride the trolley to the Center. This would be a draw for all the region (round about)...from Utah Co South and Logan North.
We would have a very unique offering here. Multi cultural shopping and entertainment. Historic 25th St...extended. The Junction. And, no business lost because the prospective shoppers are gliding overhead unable to disembark to enjoy any of it!

While the streetcar project is coming together, we have plenty of comfortable buses for the folks to ride.

I do hope our Planning Commission and City Council go after this thoughtfully but aggressivley. This will unite our city and coupled with Ogden's natural beauties we will be the crown jewel of Northern Utah! OLE!

Anonymous said...

Am curious as to why in the Ogden City Update of August 31st, (especially since it states that the "information prepared and submitted by the Ogden City Mayor's Office") that he let a representative from Nidecker state that the ultimate decision to come to Ogden was because of the gondola to Snow Basin. It's common knowledge that his office has received more than one letter from Snow Basin saying that they don't want the connection. Doesn't the mayor or his people proof what they publish out of his office? This was obviously a blatant lie that he wants to continue to tell or an act of incompetence in not knowing what being published in his office with his name attached. Neither cause is a good reflection on his office or for that matter on the City of Ogden and its residents that voted this guy in.

I would suspect that if Godfrey and family do own property on 23rd St., it's probably near where one on the proposed gondola passenger terminals will be located, i.e. he might see his property value go up while everyone else's goes down. Does anyone know or can they find out where his or his family holdings are?

As far as planting more trees on 23rd St. to obscure the view of gondola riders looking into the resident's homes, trees only have leaves on them for about 7 months of the year. What privacy will the residents have those other 5 months, not to mention when the utility company comes in to trim back the trees to protect their lines. Additionally a gondola may be 35 feet above the ground at the support pole but not in between two support poles. More than likely the cars will be 10 to 15 feet lower than that in the middle.

By the way has anyone got a reason for why the mountain side east of the University has 3 or 4 cleared areas (going straight up the mountain to the east)? It's been de-vegetated recently (ugly) and I’m wondering if someone is trying to do a seismic fault examination or if something else is going on.

Also curious if the meeting that Monotreme attended and referred to, if that was also supposed to be 23rd street residents? If so what were the Geigers doing there or if not, were the Geiger appropriate at the meeting that Monotreme did attend?

Anonymous said...

Go down o the weber county recorders office, ask for a plat map. It tells you who owns the property in the area you are looking for.

Anonymous said...

I don't live on 23rd or on Harrison along the proposed gondola route [if I did, I'd probably feel differnetly about this], but the visibility and privacy matters seem to me to be the kind of [relatively] minor things LO is delighted to have people arguing about.

The key points about the downtown to WSU gondola proposal are, it seems to me, these:

1. It is not a mass transit system. UTA made it very plain in its letter to the Mayor on this explaining UTA's reluctance to put money into it. It will do nothing to develop business along its route between downtown and WSU and may in fact make it more difficult for customers to access businesses along the west side of Harrison [where the proposed gondola pillars will be sited].

2. It will require the sale of the the city's largest park and its strategic undeveloped bench lands to a real estate speculator to raise the money necessary to build it.

3. Since its major purpose will be to service Mr. Peterson's proposed Mt. gondola from WSU to Malan's Basin, its "success" in terms of ridership depends substantially, and for three months of the year entirely, on the success of the Malan's Basin ski development. If that fails, it will be a gondola with nearly no riders. And to date, we have seen no feasiblity studies indicating that a west slope ski development at the level of Malan's Basin in fact feasible. We have seen no market studies looking at whether there is sufficient likely demand for a Malan's Basin mini-ski venue. And so on.

As for the companies that have already relocated to Ogden having done so because of the possibility that there might someday be gondola from downtown connecting to another gondola that will not go to Snow Basin... well, I don't believe it. Though there have been rumors that Hizzonah has been assuring firms he is trying to attract that the gondola is "a done deal." But I cannot document that. Only rumor [several] at this point. However, we do know that Hizzonah continued to insist that the gondola would connect Ogden with Snow Basin, even after repeated letters from Snow Basin saying they are not intersted in a gondola connection to Malan's Basin and Ogden over the ridge. And even though Mr. Peterson's land does not extend to the crest of the ridge between Malan's Basin and Snow Basin. And even though the Forest Service, which owns the land between Mr. Peterson's land and the ridge top, has stated in its recent forest plan that it will support no further ski developments along the Wasatch Front.

The Mayor's disingenuousness on this point was so blatant, Mr. Peterson apparently asked him to tone down the claims on the city website regarding connecting to Snow Basin. Some were, but some were not. It would not surpise me at all to learn that Hizzonah has been telling companies he is pitching to come to Ogden that the gondola will connect downtown with Snow Basin lickety splite and nary a problem.

As for the latest round of Mayoral evening by invitation only soirees [actually, pitch sessions for the gondola proposals], the Mayor can invote whoever he pleases to these. If he wants to invite Messrs. Bob and Curt Geiger to every one, he can do so. Of course, it rather undermines the story that invitations to the meetings are being limited to 23rd Street residents. But they are his meetings. He can invite whoever he pleases.

I wonder if the press has been invited to any of the latest round of meetings? I wonder if pess has attended any? I wonder if press has tried to attend? Anybody know?

Anonymous said...

I'm wondering how one's property value can INcrease with a huge tower in front of it?

Seems like I'd want to unload any property on 23rd St if I knew that goofball scheme was actually gonna glide.

OgdenLover said...

Anon:
"Go down o the weber county recorders office, ask for a plat map. It tells you who owns the property in the area you are looking for."

Possibly, but perhaps not in all cases.

I'd suspect you will find the names of holding companies and other groups listed for many properties. Finding out exactly WHO comprises and benefits from these groups may be more involved and difficult.

© 2005 - 2014 Weber County Forum™ -- All Rights Reserved