First in order is this interesting Steve Gehrke front page feature, briefly summarizing the history of several of the various Malan's Basin Resort schemes that have arisen and faded away since the early 1900's. In a case of family history deja vu, the article profiles Ogden resident Maurice Richards, uncle of prominent present-day gondolists Ed and Bernie Allen. Uncle Maurice is a gondolist from an earlier generation of a committed Malan's Basin Gondolist family, reporter Gehrke informs us. Gondolism is a tradition in the Richards family -- the single-minded inter-generational familial obsession that will not die.
Richards reminisces about the failure of another ambitious gondola plan which withered and died in the 60's, when two gondola-proponent county commissioners were ushered out of office by the ever-sensible voters of Weber County:
Richards said the project was rolling along toward fruition when election time came around and his two fellow commissioners, Favero and Elmer Carver, lostNo business sense, indeed. Richards has by no means given up on his family's gondola dream, however. Gondolism runs in the blood, it would seem. The Richards clan are not quitters -- no, nay never:
their seats.
"The two fellows who came in were caretakers rather than commissioners," Richards said. "They had no imagination or business sense at all, and they cut all the plans right off."
Richards said the commission trashed the long-coming idea, and it was never seen again.
Richards said he is hopeful the gondola project will succeed this time so people might rediscover the beauty of the area the Malans had established more than 100 years ago.Where have we heard that last line before, we ask? Thanks to this morning's Standard-Examiner story we now know it's an ancient and cherished Richards family tradition.
"I think, for the community, it would be one of the best things that ever happened,"he said. "We need this to have things that other western cities don't have."
And speaking of deja vu, reporter Gehrke offers up this interesting background information, from the venerable Bernie Diamond, one of Maurice Richards' generational peers. Mr. Diamond was an Emerald City mover and shaker during the period of the 1960's, and if memory serves, a former (6 year) Emerald City councilman, and also former acting mayor of the capital city of the Land of Oz:
Hmm...There is truly "nothing new under the sun" here in Emerald City, as the foregoing comments aptly illustrate.But Bernie Diamond, who was the head of the chamber of commerce around the time the old gondola was being proposed, said there are still lingering doubts similar to those of 40 years ago.
"The big question was, would there really be enough people who would go out of their way to come to Ogden to ride a gondola?
"I think the feeling was that it would not be a destination point. While it might be a novelty to begin with, you couldn't keep it going."
A second Standard-Examiner article places on the front page the information that the Std-Ex had hidden on the obituary page yesterday. "Council to set up gondola process", this morning's section B headline announces.
Now that this information is in the general public domain, we do hope Emerald City citizens will pack the council chamber tonight. Many of us are asking why the Emerald City Council and Planning Commission are falling over themselves to set up procedures for a plan which has not yet materialized. Perhaps some of our questions will be answered this evening.
The floor is now open for your gentle comments.
19 comments:
The Ogden City Council intends to pay for an independent economic and environmental analysis of a project that could transform the east bench of the city with luxury homes and a mountainside gondola.
Those two points are part of a resolution expected to be approved by the council tonight.
The resolution details the process the council plans to follow in considering the proposal - promoted by Chris Peterson of Sandy and Mayor Matthew Godfrey...
..."Too many people out there think it's a done deal," said Garcia. "It's not even close to a done deal. We don't even have a proposal yet."
Ogden council to consider action for east bench luxury homes, gondola
By Kristen Moulton
The Salt Lake Tribune
Thanks for the link Dian. We too found chairman Garcia's comments encouraging.
A substantial segment of the less informed population indeed believes the Landgrab scheme is a "done" deal; and we're happy to hear that the council is preparing to set the record straight.
And we'll go on record as saying that we believe tonight's council project is a good thing. We believe the establishment of a set procedure, in advance of the submission of any Peterson proposal, will keep the council from being put back on its heels if and when any such proposal does arrive.
As we've invariably observed so many times in the past in Emerald City, the Peterson proposal will be predictably submitted in the usual "get it done yesterday" atmosphere that typifies any project connected with Boss Godfrey.
It'll be good for the council to have "their ducks lined up;" and it will prevent much confusion down the road, we believe.
We'd like to offer one additional admonition to the council as it prepares its procedure: We believe that the council should make the express public statement that all pre-proposal activities are entirely preparatory, and "non-binding on the council," and that such pre-proposal details should not be interpreted as evidence of any actual legal commitment on the council's part to pursue this project.
The council should make it publicly clear that it expects no legal obligations to be imposed upon the citizens of Emerald City prior to the presentation and execution of an actual written document, setting forth the complete obligations of all parties to the transaction.
We fear that the many actions on the part of the council and planning commission could be misconstrued by Mr. Peterson as actions evidencing consent to this project. We need to nip such arguments in the bud, we think.
English translation of Mr. Richards' Comment in this morning's SE:
The SE reports the following comment by Mr. Maurice Richards, advocate of a previous gondola scheme that failed:
Richards said the project was rolling along toward fruition when election time came around and his two fellow [county ] commissioners, Favero and Elmer Carver, lost their seats.
"The two fellows who came in were caretakers rather than commissioners," Richards said. "They had no imagination or business sense at all, and they cut all the plans right off."
Richards said the commission trashed the long-coming idea, and it was never seen again.
I thought I might try a plain English translation of that: "But the voters tossed two gondola advocates off the county commission and elected instead two who thought the scheme was not a wise one for the Commission to endorse."
That's about it, I'd say. Shorter and a great deal plainer that Mr. Richards spin I think.
I like the fact that the council is setting up a procedure to be in the driver's seat on this. They must be, as Godfrey is a complete hack.
The part I don't like is using tax money AT THIS TIME to do an independent assessment.
What is the basis for this expenditure - pamphlets circulated by Pee Wee Geiger and company? There is not even a proposal yet!
A better approach would be to set up some definite hurdles, like the requiring the Mt. Ogden community plan and many other such things, but also state that no further city time or money is to be spent on this matter until a proposal is submitted. That will then put us at SQUARE ONE, when the debate and considerations can BEGIN.
While it would be better to spend city $$ on other needs, hopefully having the CC decide who evaluates the hillside and bench will provide an independant opinion. What we don't need is to have someone come in who is beholden to the Mayor and Peterson who will whitewash any potential problems and give a clear go-ahead for building if that isn't the case.
My fear is that if plans go ahead without due diligence, some wealthy Californian will buy one of those $700,000 hillside homes and then sue the crap out of the city if it is destroyed in a landslide or earthquake. People with income like that have lawyers, you know. Ogden City will still be here, while for all we know, Chris P. will be off skiing in the Andes by then.
Open comment to the Council Members,
Tonight’s resolution should be about requiring Peterson to provide us with the information that we need to make an informed decision as to whether to spend any more time or city money on this proposal. Give him a deadline. Addressing mixed use zoning and sensitive area overlay zones first only removes our safeguards for protecting our open space. Further is make it easier for the open space to be reclassified or rezoned without the City Council’s input in the future.
The keystone of this whole proposal is supposed to be a large high end resort in Malan Basin and not a real estate play on our open space, as such why are we addressing his requirements for the real estate play first? Isn’t the development in Malan Basin supposed to put Ogden on the map? It’s simple, no viable keystone, no project.
We need to see detained numbers from the developer that the Malan Basin project is viable and we need these numbers first. Since all other projects being proposed, support that development we should have an understanding as to the scope of the development in Malan basin which would include detailed plans regarding the development’s footprint, the timing as to when it will be developed, the construction cost estimates +/- 30%, and a financial proforma for the operations at Malan Basin.
These are the first things any investor or lending institution would require to validate the projects viability. If the project is deemed viable, then you can layer on the various associated projects that have been thoroughly vetted and that add synergy to the keystone.
Once again I think we are putting the cart in front of the horse.
I can't agree with you today, Rudi. The council doesn't need its 'ducks in a row' at this point. And, absolutley NOT on paying for any studies for Peterson's unproposed proposal.
Geez...I was sickened to see that Malan's Basin puff piece on the FRONT page of the Se today. Now who planted that?
And just when I thot the SE editorial board was getting a little smarter.
There have been NO studies of any stripe, that we've seen, paid for by Peterson. There have been NO set of plans, propsals, money shown to the Council or to the Planning Commission.
Contrary to what Garcia says, the mayor and his lap dogs are touting this as a 'done deal'. Why the blazes would the SE put this crap on the front page if they aren't in on this scam also?
I had to read Kristen Moulton's fine article today to get the whole story about the Council meeting tonite.
Is anyone else burned up?
Between what's happening in Congress and the attemped rape of Ogden's beauties, I feel sick all the time.
Rudi, you've asked for a turnout tonite...well good luck. Every time we ask for that, most of the posters here stay home. Putting the cart before the horse, is right, Anonymous.
The gondola process story printed on the obit page is so apt.
A quick comment regarding resolution dealing with process for Peterson proposal. The Council tabled it until January 23rd.
Regarding the newest member of the Planning Commission: Who is he? Why didn't we hear his name spoken at the meeting? Why didn't the Council approve/disapprove him in the open meeting? He was on the agenda. Was he another one like Janith Wright and Lillie Holman who rec'd their 'welcome to the PC' letters without the council using their authority to approve?
Thank goodness, Lilie is a real asset who THINKS for herself, asks questions and responds to the public.
If anyone knows anything about Lain Hueton, please respond.
Sharon,
From the Ogden City Website:
Iain Hueton - Chair, Parks & Recreation Advisory Committee
According to the website, there are two vacancies on this committee. Maybe you or another interested blogger should offer your services. Instructions for submitting your/one's name are there.
More people attended the Council meeting tonight than are usually there.
That 'Process Resolution" was laid before us. Stephenson said it's no different than what is required for all new businesses...the 'process is the same.' Then why have a special one for Peterson?? The developer or whomever shows what he's about...his plans, any studies that are required, costs, etc. THAT"S the way proper business is conducted as Matt Mossbarger noted.
Has anyone seen even one plan from Peterson? Twice, the fact that Peterson has not answered even ONE of the 184 questions presented to him about 6 months ago was mentioned or confirmed by Wicks and Jeske. Also asked by Don Wilson, first speaker of the evening.
Have you noticed that Pete is nowhere to be seen? I'm wondering if his mouthpiece ordered him to keep his mouth shut because every time he opens it, he shows himself to be uninformed and dim. Also, he managed to give the masses a more outrageous story at each dog and pony show. Remember the 2000 dorm rooms downtown WITHOUT kitchens so the the students would eat at the snack bar and BOND for life? I'd heave a sigh, but the mayor ordered that kind of expression stopped!
Only 3 people spoke in favor of this 'process'. Gary Neilson said that any delay in passing this will 'cost the city money'. How? Doing nothing is a fine way to NOT spend money.
Bob Geiger wants the council to get out there and get answers! Well, maybe the cops could get Pete in a headlock til he started talking and giving up his big plan. Bob could help. Being a military guy and all.
Curt said his friend wants to open a Starbucks, but wants to know what's happening in Ogden! Nonsense...Curt, encourage your pals to "Lift Ogden" by opening some retail stores, cafes, a midtown grocery, and shops. Those will generate revenue, shoppers, coffee drinkers, diners and help Ogden to be a happenin' town!
What are they waiting for?? Haven't they heard of doing a market analysis? All the successful businesses do that. They determine where the market is NOW.
Well, the public will be invited to give input. The Council will vote on this unnecessary resolution on Jan 23. So, tell all the citizens to start talking to the Council! Neilson is opposed to a public process and the delay, because 'people will come up here (podium) and be against the PLAN!!!' Well, duh, what the *&^$#%^&%$#^ does he think this "Process" is all about?
Too bad the Council didn't table til end of February after the PC has discussed the Mixed Use Zoning changes. Remember, all of Peterson/Godfrey's hopes are pinned on changing our General Plan and the zoning NOW before they come up with one smidgen of what's actually IN their visions.
Catering to a visionary and a land grabber...is that the proper role of government?
Hate to come on again...but OgLover...thanx for your response. ME???? Can you imagine the mayor nominating me for anything but a pine box? thanx, tho.
Sharon:
Just too good to be true. Bob's friend wants to open a Starbucks in Ogden, but won't until he knows what the process will be for considering the as-yet non-existent Peterson proposal?
Sure, Bob. And every Thanksgiving the Great Pumpkin visits the most sincere pumpkin patch in the land. Linus told me so so it must be true.
Get a life, frankie....Curt, Bob and Neilson were quoted...if that's ridicule...go to them!
Progress? Progress is doing what's right by all the citizens...if you were there, you heard the residents around Gibson and 12th Streets begging for tax relief...and Harmer was supposed to talk to them. I didn't see him follow them out of chambers, but I hope he did. How about letting the folks comment before the vote? That would be progress too.
On The Council in re: Peterson non-proposal:
1. I think the Council's decision to fund its own examination of the proposal if and whenever it appears is a wise one. Should a Peterson Proposal ever in fact materialize, if I were on the Council, I would want to make sure that the information submitted in support of it was credible. I would not, on a project of this presumed magnitude with financial and other consequences [good or bad] for Ogden likely to cascade forward for decades, want to rely only on the promoter's projections and information. The Council paying for its own study seems to me wise policy and a wise expenditure of public funds. However the study turns out.
2. Just finished reading the SE story headlined "Ogden Tables Gondola Project" [another not very accurate headline, by the way]. I'd link it, but the SE's digital edition seems not to be working this morning. The oddest thing in the story is this: "Bob Geiger, chairman of Lift Ogden which supports Peterson's proposal, said the City Council should take it upon themselves to find out more about the project instead of waiting for information to be delivered."
Wow. Don't I seem to recall that the Council sent Mr. Peterson via the Mayor a fairly long list of questions about the proposal he has not yet made, asking for information? And Mr. Peterson has so far stonewalled the Council on all the questions. Seems to me the Council did , as Mr. Bob Geiger put it, "take it upon themselves to find out more about the project" and that Mr. Peterson didn't much care for that and didn't bother to reply.
Do I detect a note of frustration among the Lift Ogden Amen Chorus with the way Mayor Godfrey and Mr. Peterson have handled the whole gondola/Malan's Basin proposition? A certain unhappiness with the way it was presented by the Mayor before it was ready for prime time? Before it was a fully developed proposal? Is Mr. Geiger too unhappy with the lack of hard information coming from the Mayor's office and from the AWOL Mr. Peterson? Looks like it to me.
Now, either Mr. Geiger himself has the information he's asking the Council to seek out [in which case the question arises, why doesn't he tell the Council what he knows and what he thinks the members should know?], or he does not have that information. In which case he seems to be, as head of Lift Ogden, strongly supporting a project about which he knows, apparently, very little that is concrete and specific. But he's for it anyway, whatever it may turn out to be.
Mr. Geiger's comments really are... well, odd. He wants the Council to on its own seek out information about a proposal that has not yet been made by a developer who has refused to answer the Council's questions about the non-proposal for months now.
It's a very very strange world these Lift Ogden folks live in.
Today's NY Times has a long and interesting piece on the increasing number of states limiting powers of eminient domain being used for economic development. Headline: "Voters Back Limits on Eminent Domain: More States Restrict Power to Force Sale Of Land for Economic Development. Link here.
If Geigers friend is sitting on his hands waiting for some sign of ogden's reemergence he is already behind the curve, as is the mayor and the rest of the LO fools. If they don't secure their business property for their Starbucks(only Geiger would think in terms of corporate coffee), guess what...they will be paying alot more for their business property because they failed to take a small risk on a city that will be rebuilt without a gondola, thankfully. Ogden is smokin' right now under their noses. They obviously have not been outside of their cocoon for awhile. Take a look Bob and Curt, my neighborhood has seen several dozen home sales in the last couple of months. That's a real indication of something afoot and it ain't a gondola. Most of these INVESTOR's are far ahead of you, Bob, and your friends. Good luck because these folks are serious and are buying.
Curt and Bob can't get off the old "Lift Ogden" sales pitch for why we need peterson's development, that pitch being that Ogden is in need of jobs and that the housing market is in the dumps. Those guys need to read the front page story in today's paper on jobs, read the weekend want adds and go price local real estate. The only exception to the advancing local real estate pricing is in the inner-city part of town.
Think of how much more money would flow into the the city's bank account if the value of property in inner-city Ogden started to take off. What Ogden really needs to do is start improving the inner-city situation, i.e. start addressing crime, gangs and start encouraging owner occupancy over rental property.
Ogden City needs to stop diverting money from the basic services and needs of the city in order to chase to these pie in the sky business development opportunities.
Everyone wants to try an hit a home run but in reality most games are won with singles and doubles.
New comments are not allowed.