The Standard-Examiner provides a special treat this morning, as we drop into another Emerald City weekend. This morning's edition features a nasty bullet-point rant by Lift Ogden Windbag Bob Geiger, raging against our Emerald City RDA Board of Trustees, which is now preparing to call Boss Godfrey on the carpet with new procedures guarding against future insider transactions, such as the now notorious Bootjack sweetheart purchase option. We'd recently thought Tom Ellison and the Peterson crew had wisely and cautiously kept the flamboyant Junior Geiger under careful wraps. That's all changed utterly. Little Bobby is back.
The facts surrounding this transaction are quite clear. We've discussed the situation thoroughly here, here and here. In point of fact, Boss Godfrey deceitfully concealed and suppressed the fact that his croney Chris Peterson was the true owner and principal of the Bootjack shell entity, prior to the transaction. Yes, The RDA Board had previously asked for disclosure, but approved the transaction anyway, in spite of the administration's continuing and wilful failure and refusal to disclose Chris Peterson's identity. As we've learned subsequently in our below threads on this subject however, the RDA Board was pressured into going along with Boss Godfrey because the transaction was characterized as a financial emergency. Cost overruns were jeopardizing the Junction Project timetable, the Board was told by the administration. The RDA Board, in its incessant effort to be cooperative, thus opted to drop its request for disclosure. In its effort to be a "team player," the Board ultimately found itself with egg on its face. In the aftermath, this lapse in judgment proved to be most imprudent, as the Board has learned during this past week. Looking at the situation from the Board's viewpoint, it's hard to conceive, however, that any one of them might have imagined, at the time the purchase option was approved, that Boss Godfrey would have had the audacity to flagantly pawn off three parcels adjacent to the FrontRunner terminal in a stealth transaction to a close associate like Peterson.
Mr. Geiger complains that the RDA Board would discriminate against Boss Godfrey's croney, that Chris Peterson's money is just as good as anybody else's. Boss Godfrey's cronies should be able to benefit from secretly-arranged deals. Economic perks are, after all, one of the prime benefits of being a Godfrey croney. That's how it works in our Brave New MattGodfreyWorld. Mr. Geiger thought everybody already knew that.
Mr. Geiger lays in particularly brutally upon council members Garcia, Wicks and Jeske this morning. The whole brouhaha is politically motivated, he says. This is of course the accusation that Boss Godfrey always drags out, whenever our conscientious council resolves to do its duty, and possible ethical or criminal breaches on the part of Boss Godfrey become part of the public discussion.
We were admittedly a little overly hard on the RDA Board over the past week or so, after first learning about this "smelly" Bootjack transaction. Our email box had been crammed with angry reader missives. It was the same in our comments sections. We weren't the only ones who experienced a visceral reaction. In hindsight we stand chastened, and applaud out RDA Board, who've tried over past months to adopt a posture that would seem co-operative and progressive. Hard lessons are the best lessons, however; and hopefully the Board has now learned that the RDA Board of Trustees simply cannot fulfill their primary roles (as public trustees,) and trust Boss Godfrey simultaneously. If Boss Godfrey says the sky is blue, we're sure that our RDA members will now have learned to take a peek out the nearest window. If Boss Godfrey shows up to the next RDA meeting and sits down in the RDA Director's chair, we do hope Chairman Garcia will instruct the Board Sergeant-at-Arms to check the Boss's ID.
The floor is open. Who amongst our gentle readers would like to comment on the latest Bob Geiger lunatic rant?
We always appreciate a good red-meat article to chew on as we move into the weekend; and we thank the Standard-Examiner for providing us just that.
113 comments:
I felt that Geiger put up quite a good premise and argument.
Ask Curt Geiger what he thinks about Geiger's premise and argument.
Curt Geiger
Rudi:
You might also have noted that WCF readers read every, and I do mean every, point raised by Mr. Geiger in his SE Op-Ed right here on WCF some days ago. Once again, the SE follows the WCF's lead. [As I recall, WCF broke the news of the Mayor's concealing the fact that Mr. Peterson was the buyer of the property involved.]
Of course, WCF readers also saw Mr. Geiger's points discussed at some length here [and I'd say countered], which SE readers may get to do sometime in the future. Perhaps.
Mr. Geiger needs to learn the difference between "principle" and "principal".
He continually uses "principle" in his editorial, which is ironic, because he seems to be lacking in same. Principles, Mr. Geiger, are those things that people with well-developed moral senses exhibit regularly.
"Principal", on the other hand, means "first, chief, main, or most important", which is the usage he's trying to grasp in his Op-Ed piece.
Further, I can't see how someone's arguments can "reek of possible discrimination". It's like saying that the bean aisle as Smith's "reeks of possible flatulence". No discrimination has been shown to occur (except in the fevered mind of Mr. Geiger), so it can't reek, now, can it?
Dear Monotone
You prove BG's point.
The fact that Chris Peterson bought the property that the entire RDA voted to sell at a price they felt was fair, suddenly smells because it as Chris Peterson buying it.
This is discrimination against CP.
ANON
Actually there IS discrimination in the instant case. Under the facts of the Bootjack transaction, Boss Godfrey has fraudulently discriminated in favor of his close croney Peterson, at the expense of all other buyers in the free market, who might have wanted to make an offer on the property.
Except for the wilful deceit of Boss Godfrey, the RDA Board would have been put on notice of a possibly discriminatory insider deal, and they could have adopted measures (such as Curmudgeon's proposed 30-day advertisement) to ensure the property was sold for fair market value.
Bob Geiger's silly "discrimination" accusation is a double-edged sword, we think.
As the situation stands, the Bootjack transaction represents to most reprehensible form of discrimination imaginable to us.
Mono:
Nice catch on "reek of possible discrimination."
I also not that Mr. Geiger conveniently left out of his account the Administration's presentation of the sale as an emergency measure that had to be completed immediately so the money could be applied right away to construction work on the Mall parking structure so the Adventure Center could open this June. [An urgency created, by the way, as I recall, by the Administration's bungling of the Shupe-Williams property sale, which sale was supposed to have raised the necessary quarter of a million, though strangely Mr. Geiger didn't see fit to mention that either.]
As for the "all politics" claim: well, it's funny, really to watch folks who insist that the people on their side are statesmen, public servants and selfless civic-minded citizens, while those who think differently are merely playing politics. Ranks right up there with Mr. Curt Geiger's oft-stated willingness to have participate in "the process" only folks who already agree with him on the policy to be adopted. People who think otherwise are, of course, only interested in obstruction.
And the beat goes on....
First of all I was glad to see that the mayor has also weighed in on the ethics issue, on yesterday’s WCF thread.
I think it is very important to understand that now in addition to being the spokespersons for the entire business community, based on Bobby’s screed he is now the official spokesperson for Dorrene Jeske, since a major part of his letter supposedly is quoting her and informing us all of her opinions. In addition, he is now the arbiter of morality. You see, if someone gets away with being deceptive, it was the fault of the one who was deceived. Take that, city council!
And thanks Bob, for the update on what Dorrene is saying and thinking.
Lastly, it would be nice if the Geigers would take some lessons in grammar and spelling as has been pointed out above as well as previously. These supposedly “best and brightest” do not present themselves well when they apparently can neither compose sentences nor spell correctly.
Why the paper refuses to edit or exhibit any selectivity when it prints one “guest commentary” after another from the Geigers is what is most irritating of all.
Dear Curm
Are you saying that the City Council should not be held accountable for unethical behavior because they were told the situation was an emergency. Is an emergency an excuse for unethical behavior?
If a dire situation is an excuse for discarding one's ethics then could not the Mayor be given a pardon from the WCF for the same reason?
Why do you hold only the Mayor to your standards?
ANON
Anon 9:47
Be nice, if you want to engage on the issue, not to put words in my mouth. No where did I say the Council had acted in this matter unethically. I think they probably acted unwisely and the rapid approval was ill-advised. But I'm not in the habit of accusing people of being unethical merely because they voted differently on a matter than I think I would have, or because I think they acted unwisely.
I can see in this matter only two possible unethical actions, and neither was a Council action: (a)only Mr. Peterson being aware that the parcels were for sale, and his being permitted to offer on them without anyone else being given the opportunity and (b) the Mayor's refusal to supply the RDA Board [Council] with the name of the purchaser when the Council specifically asked for it.
Happy to argue those two out with out, if you can resist putting words in my mouth and claiming I said things I neither said nor implied.
Ahem, ANON:
"Is an emergency an excuse for unethical behavior?"
First off, your query presupposes that the council's behavior was unethical. Nobody here has conceded that point.
Speaking for himself, Rudi would label the council's actions in this transaction as imprudent at the very worst, but certainly not ethically suspect. We suggest you write this down so you don't forget it.
As for the question whether it might have been proper for the RDA board to act quickly, in respose to perceived exigent circumstances, the answer is probably "yes" in this circumstance.
The administration had predicated its approval request on emergency circumstances, urged a quick decision in the matter, and the Board obviously relied on the assumption (unfounded in this instance,) that everything about the transaction, including the proffered purchase price was "above-board."
And as one of our readers upthread has already noted, BOSS Godfrey's deceitful conduct is not fairly "chargeble" to the RDA Board, who until that time plainly relied (however gullibly) on the administration's truth and honesty.
Please do yourself a favor, and cease trying to hang the problem on the council. Anyone who uses their head for anything more than hanging their hat knows where the real problem lies in this transaction -- Boss Godfrey.
Hopefully th ecouncil learned a few hard lessons in the past few days about trusting anything the administration says.
The Option read that Peterson was putting $1,000.00 down on the deal.
I question that the remaining $269,000.00 has been received.
Good point, Skeptic.
There seems to be no evidence yet that the option has actually been exercised.
If Peterson and Godfrey are politically smart, they'll just let it expire in the middle of this month; and this whole scandal might just blow over in a few weeks.
This is Boss Godfrey's most egregious ethical blunder yet; and you can rest assurred that Boss Godfrey's shaky ethics will be a primary issue in the upcoming November Municipal Election.
Dear Rudi
According to the News Report the Mayor did not lie to anyone.
According to the news report he did not respond to a question asked.
How is that a lie?
ANON
Dear Rudi
What was material about the property being purchased by Chris Peterson.
Are you saying that the RDA would have acted differently had they known it was CP?
ANON
Show us the place where we used that terminology, please. Once again you recklessly put words in other people's mouths.
What we're talking about the the suppression of a material fact in this transaction. Concealing a fact that he was ethically bound to disclose, individually, or through his agent Harmer, in other words.
(Failure to tell the whole truth.)
Tantamount to a lie, in our book however, and identical in effect.
Any other questions?
How does anyone know that nobody else made an offer? What does it matter that Geiger wrote an Op/Ed a couple of days after the WCF made all of these startling points? Or did they?
"What was material about the property being purchased by Chris Peterson."
Peterson is a Godfrey croney, in case you haven't already noticed.
Failure to disclose relevant information is considered unethical.
Dave Harmer said he deliberately withheld information precisely because he suspected and hoped that the withholding of that information would be more likely to get the council to do what he wanted. Withholding information that is important to the other person and that they have a right to, in order to get them to do what you want, is unethical. Everyone knows that.
The noose than hangs Godfrey comes from Dave Harmer’s own mouth, not the council. Continuing to use attempted sophistry to excuse this clearly unethical behavior only proves how corrupt some of these people are.
As far as the option expiring later this month, if the property is worth more than the $270K, then Peterson will sell the option to whomever he wants, at a profit, not let it expire. Remember, his total investment so far is only a lousy $1K. Anything he can get for the land over the $270K, he gets to keep.
Dear Rudy
You continue to call CP a croney of Mayor Godfrey.
What makes you think that CP is a good friend of the Mayor and not a person that the Mayor is dealing with from a business position only.
How do you know the personel feelings of the Mayor toward Chris Peterson?
I suppose we need to get a definition here. We need to apply some standard of cronyism to all of the public servants.
ANON
We suppose you need to get a life...
And take your moral compass into the shop for a tuneup.
Have a nice day, anonymous.
:-)
Dear Danny
Please tell me why, knowing that Chris Peterson was the buyer, is relavant information.
ANON
A retailer is looking at buying several million dollars worth of Descente ski clothing.
“This material feels flimsy,” he says. “Is this quality material? Is the sewing done properly?”
Curt Geiger starts talking about the weather. Eventually the deal closes, because the customer decides to trust him, as he trusts his other suppliers.
A few months later, swamped with returned merchandise, the retailer calls Geiger. “What’s the big idea selling me this junk?” he asks. “You know I only handle top quality merchandise in my stores. I trusted you.”
“I never lied to you,” says Curt. “Show me where anything I ever told you was a lie. If you wanted to be sure the material was good, you shouldn’t have bought it from me until you found out.”
After the phone call, Curt and Matt go to lunch together. “You know something? I never lie,” said Curt. “Me neither,” Matt replied.
Anon 11:42
Let me take a stab at this. You ask why knowing that Peterson is the buyer is relevant information. I could simply reverse the question and ask "Why was Peterson's identity withheld from the RDA board if it was not significant information?"
But let me take a stab at the Q as you asked it: (a) the parcels involved were RDA parcels of land (b) in most cases, the RDA has demanded of prospective buyers that they make clear how they intend to develop the land to make sure it is consistent with the purpose for which the RDA area was created (c)in this case, according to the papers, Mr. Peterson submitted no proposed development plans for the parcels he wanted to buy (d) nevertheless, no notice was given to others that the parcels [which we now learn from the Administration the city has no particular development plans for] were available with no planning or development restrictions, for sale (e)Mr. Peterson is well-known to be closely associated with the Mayor via the gondola/gondola Peterson proposals (f) the RDA Board asked who the buyer was and the Administration refused to tell the Board (g) therefor, under these circumstances, at the very least, the impression has been created [i.e. a reasonable person could reasonably conclude] that the Mayor's close associate received special consideration resulting in the "secret" sale to him of three parcels of RDA land which may have garnered more money for the RDA had others been made known of its availability for sale without RDA development restrictions.
That give you a clue?
It is possible that Mr. Peterson's offer was the best one that would have been made, and that selling the land to him was the best deal we could have made for the land at this time. The point is, because it was all done behind closed doors, so to speak, without proper public notice, and with the name of the buyer [a close associate of the Mayor], (a) we will now never know if it was the best deal for the land the city could have made and (b) we are stuck with the appearance of the Mayor's close associate [whose name was kept hidden until after the sale was completed]having gotten special consideration not available to others.
Let me add, before you ask, that if the buyer had been named Clem Kadiddlehopper instead of Chris Peterson, it would still have been wrong for the administration to sell these RDA parcels with no RDA development mandates on them, quietly with no advance public notice, to Mr. Kadiddlehopper. And it would still have been wrong if the RDA Board had asked the Administration who the buyer was, for the Administration to have withheld Mr. Kadiddlehopper's name from it.
Hope that clears it up for you.
I hate to question those who seem to be our only line of defense between Boss Godfrey and our foothills but there are some questions that I have regarding the councils actions in this circumstance. A few articals ago Ms. Wicks stated that she knew who the owner of Bootjack, llc was long ago and passed this info on to the other members of the council. A couple of bloggers asked the question of whether or not this happened before the vote. I don't believe Ms. Wicks has responded and and it seemed as if Mrs. Jeske responded with a no comment but vote on line for officer Hammond for Most wanted All star. Maybe I missed a blogg somewhere, does anyone here know if that question has been answered? My next question is if the council reviewed the option before buying off on the deal. It is clearly signed by a Peterson. While the name might be common it certainly should have raised an eyebrow considering the current situation our city is in. I agree that the this info should have been forthcoming from the administration. Unfortunately this administrations actions and responses shouldnt come as a surprise to anyone that pays attention, let alone the council. I am sure it will be argued that these questions arn't important, but can they be answered? Ms. Wicks or Mrs. Jeske.
anon.
the fact that it was cp that bought the property is not the question, the fact the mayor didn't put it out to bid is the real question and the corrupt thing that has happen and for that reason the rda board shoud resind the agreement!!!!!!!
Dear Curm
Why did the RDA vote in favor of the sale after they had asked for the name and it was not provided?
Why would Mr Harmmer not provide the name unless he feared that the RDA would have discriminated against Chris Peterson.
The RDA clearly would have allow anyone else to buy it even Kaddidlehopper. (They did vote to sell)
Did the RDA ask what the unknown buyer was planning to do with the property? Probably not. We have zoning restrictions and the RDA knows it.
It seem to me that the issue here is only Chris Peterson. The more we discuss this the more clear it becomes.
ANON
I think a very interesting and important angle on this latest Godfrey fiasco is this:
Why would a $90 million dollar plus corporation - the Ogden City RDA - need to secretly sell off, on an emergency basis, one of their very most strategically positioned, promising and appreciating assets to raise relative chump change to cover cost over runs on their $30 million dollar Rec Center project that is obviously in trouble or they wouldn'd need an emergency cash fix in the first place!
As a minimum, it casts a huge doubt over the competency, or lack thereof, of the RDA CEO, Mr. Godfrey, and his inner circle of deciders.
These guys would not last one week in private industry in the roles they now occupy. It is only because Godfrey has hijacked this public corporation that his gang that can't shoot straight are able to hold on to their positions at the public trough. I also sometime question their morality. If they were moral would they continue to stone wall and deny the underlying moral argument that is the main issue in this latest Godfrey/Peterson brouhaha?
If the Geigers conducted Descentene's business in such a loose ethical and money losing manner would their masters in Osaka put up with it for long?
Hopefully this shameful incident will bring the RDA board to realize their fiduciary duty to the citizens of Ogden. Hopefully it will demonstrate the huge conflict that having the mayor as the RDA executive director creates. Hopefully they will scout out and hire a highly experienced and educated person to fill this role and report to them honestly and timely.
See Mr. Geiger, you were wrong, I am just brimming over with hope for the future and hope for an honest city government. Hope springs eternal as they say.
Anon,
When you're selling ski gloves, is it up to you to determine what is important to your customer or up to the customer what is important to him or her?
You see, Bob, now we know.
We know that all the business people in Ogden are Lift Ogden supporters, because you say so.
We know what Dorrene thinks, because you’ve told us.
We know that if the mayor wants to sell something to CP, it shouldn’t matter, so you say.
In fact, we know what should and should not matter to the RDA, since you’ve told us that too.
You Geigers are very vain people, and it seems you have no sense of right and wrong either.
We need to get Descente to pull your plug.
Does any one get the feeling that this Geiger fellow must be Ogden's modern day Forrest Gump?
Seems like he is at every important meeting, every important lunch, on TV every hour on Channel 17, running around meeting senators and congressmen in Washington with the mayor, visited by every businessman passing through Utah, In on all the city's secret insider dealings, etc.
You would wonder how he makes a living with as many demands on his time. Oh ya, forgot his wife is on the city's insider big timers payroll with a fat paycheck for a job that is way beyond her resume and earning history.
FOM indeed. The tax payers indirectly get to pay for all these expensive lies he spreads around to us. Like charging us for the bullets he shoots us with.
And just when we were wondering what happened to the junior geiger fish oil salesman - He has been awfully quite lately, till this morning that is. Maybe he forgot his instructions from Ellis?
Yes, Frank,
For unknown reasons, little Bobby seems to have been released from quarantine.
Strang, VERY strange...
Dear Oz B
What makes you think the the Salomon Center is over budget?
Do you know something that you can share with all of us?
ANON
Good catch, ANON!
As everybody ought to know, Bid D construction is working under a "cost pluse" contract.
As a consequence, the project can never go over budget.
Cost plus generally causes cost to go. It is a "firm bid" that keeps the project under control.
Are you sure it is cost plus?
In addition I thought that R & O was doing the construction.
ANON
Curm,
You really should take points a, b, c and d to the council. They approved the sale 7-0.
If it is unethical or illegal for the mayor to discriminate in favor of Chris Peterson, then it certainly should be considered unethical or illegal for certain council members to discriminate against Chris Peterson.
If this is not a matter of ethics or legality, but simply politics then: 1 point for the Mayor, 0 points for his opposition. Chris bought the land and certain council members were not successful in opposing him.
Here's some evidence that Ms. Jeske may be unethically biased against Chris Peterson and that the WCF uses its anonymity protection policy to protect identity theifs. (This message will self distruct in 10 seconds due to WCF thought police and control.)
-----Original Message-----
From: jeske4ogden@comcast.net [mailto:jeske4ogden@comcast.net]
Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2006 8:02 AM
Subject: FW: Weber County Forum Anonymity Policy
I'll try to get this email off to you before the grandchildren wake up. I was so tired last night after I got them to bed and picked up the house from their messes that I just fell into bed.
I did talk to the Weber County Forum site manager last night and he told me that even if he could, he would not tell us whose computer that blog posting was sent from because he strongly believes in protecting the anonymity of the people who post on his blog. He said that "Blogger" does not allow him to trace a post to the person, although he can come close, but in this case, it had been too long and he had had more than 100 hits to his blog since someone posted that "realtiger" post ("realtiger" is Ms. Jeskes unique blog profile that is accessible only by her unique username and password), and he can't go back and research any post that goes back further than 100 people accessing his blog. Neither one of us could figure out who knew my password, and he added that he knew it, but I told him that I didn't think for one second that he would do that. He said that he had had people hack into his blog site and mess with it, without a password. We both agreed that my password would not have been that hard to guess considering the "user name." I asked him to remove that post so that Chris Peterson's integrity wou
ld not be impugned any further. I was so upset at first with someone trying to discredit me that I didn't even think about how that post would affect Chris.
I am forwarding to you the information that he sent to me regarding
anonymity of the people who post anonymously. I don't know that much about the internet and have no idea if we have any other recourse to try and find who made that post. Do you have any suggestions?
--
Dorrene
Curm –
Please say yes if you want,
1) Information that this site is willing to protect the identity of identity theifs who use council member’s password protected blog identities to impugn Chris Peterson.
2) Information that Ms. Jeske’s password protected blog identity was used to unethically impugn Chris Peterson. (Her personal biography was attached.)
~ ~ ~ An Ogden Tale ~ ~ ~
Chris Peterson sees the writing on the wall before the end of the last year. His scheme is falling apart.
Matt tells him everything will be all right. Chris says he needs more than that.
Matt can’t give him an option on the golf course yet, so he asks him if he’ll take one for some fast money on some other property, and asks him how long he needs the option to last.
Chris asks: How long does it need to last?
Matt says the gondola and the golf course sale will be as good as done “by the end of next March.” The planning commission should rubber stamp everything by then.
Chris says to make the option last until the end of next March then.
But nothing works out. A majority of the planning commission turns out to be too honest, too interested in the public. And the city council refuses to be intimidated by Tom Ellison.
So mid March, Chris retails his option for a quick profit. He’s going to be done with Ogden unless Matt can roll him some more hard stuff. No more promises.
Meantime, early in March Curt and Bob know the clock is ticking for them. They told the folks in Japan that the gondola was a done deal. Godfrey was superman. The public were a bunch of blue-collar bumpkins who will roll easily. It didn’t turn out that way. Now they feel their bosses growing tired of their stories and unfounded claims.
They realize that the jig is almost up when Peterson’s option comes out in public in the WCF, then the paper. They grow frantic. They write to the paper. They start posting like madmen.
It’s because it’s their last chance before the folks in Osaka tell them the jig is up and Curt and Bob have to move back to Colorado, where they always looked a lot more like the little fish that they are. They don’t want to move. Here in Ogden they get to be big fish. The mayor calls them, and the governor.
They must make it work this time, but time is running out. Bob puts in an article in the paper without letting anybody edit it. It doesn’t matter to them anymore if they make themselves look like a-holes. It’s almost over.
Moving day is coming, Curt. Tell Bob to gas up the car for Colorado.
Yes, ANON.
And you're right. The General contractor is R&O.
In the wonderful magical Godfrey Geiger world up is down and black is white.
Why shouldn't we be biased against Peterson really?
His whole history of dealing with this city has been a string of broken promises, public relations hype, and zero follow through.
Ask yourself: "Would you enter into a long-term deal with the son-in-law of the Billionaire?
The answer is obvious. Of course you wouln't.
Why then should the RDA do that then?
His lack of capabilty to carry out any promise is demonstrated by his deeds.
We call on Sheriff Slater to escort him across the border to some other county.
Rudizink,
Ok -
So...objectivity and logic are out here.
Now that that is on the table, we can look at everything else you say with the understanding that you are extremely discriminatory and have discarded the ability to handle the entire debate with any kind of objectivity.
I'd say that there is a very likely chance, given your previous statements, that the entire issue here is political and that the Mayor and Chris Peterson did nothing wrong. Futher, that it may be likely that Ms. Jeske, Mr. Garcia and Ms. Wicks share your same bias.
This was the premise of this morning's guest commentary by Bob Geiger.
Good job.
Objectivity and logic are actually the guiding force here.
Of course yout blogmeister only speaks for himself, and does not pretend to speak for the RDA Board or anybody else.
You finally got it Rudi-
Its a political issue, and you are extremely biased and devoid of the ability to engage in this debate in a logical way.
This is the concern that many are beginning to have with regard to our city council.
Hey tough guy,
Read your words again....your first statement exposes you're bias.
You can't go back and say....wait...were objective.
Go back and read Bobby's article. Then, go back and read the post you made below. Then say to yourself, "Bob Geiger may have a point here."
It'll be good for you.
RudiZink said...
Why shouldn't we be biased against Peterson really?
His whole history of dealing with this city has been a string of broken promises, public relations hype, and zero follow through.
Ask yourself: "Would you enter into a long-term deal with the son-in-law of the Billionaire?
The answer is obvious. Of course you wouln't.
Why then should the RDA do that then?
His lack of capabilty to carry out any promise is demonstrated by his deeds.
We call on Sheriff Slater to escort him across the border to some other county.
March 02, 2007 2:38 PM
Many? Meaning the Geigers and Boss Godfrey?
There is ample evidence to suggest that Chris Peterson is a bad bet for Emerald City.
His track record for the last year says it all.
Ask Curt Geiger if you spell libel or liable.
Curt Geiger
LIBEL
Sorry about that.
ANON
Curt geiger obviously isn't a member of our fraternity.
"Sorry about that.
ANON"
THat's OK. We already kenw you were a dunce.
Even these lame attempts at spin and damage control are flawed. These Godfreyites can't seem to get anything right.
Trying to teach them an integrity lesson, like some of you are doing here, is like trying to teach a pig table manners. Every thing they learn goes right out the window once they see the public trough.
Hey now, I'd like to call " point of order", You bloggers that insist on calling little Matty's henchmen "the gang that can't shoot straight" are clearly dead wrong.The postings and their activity of this past week clearly underscore one fact. When they shoot they never miss,the bullet goes straight into their foot.
Rudi
Let's try this for the 4th or 5th time.
Is there a possibility that MS Jeske's idenity was not stolen. That someone did not steal her password.
Were her statements about Chris Peterson libel?
Is there a possibility of a civil suit?
Do you think CP has a copy of the statements made about him?
ANON
What an amazing place this is...
It took me about 50 posts to get Rudi to allow any information about Ms. Jeske's e-mail to post here. It also to about 50 posts to get Rudi to allow any information about his willingness to protect identity theft.
The information is in Ms. Jeske's own words. In Rudi's own words, he's biased and not objective with regard to the issue of Chris Peterson.
Silliness.
Rudi's lame attempt at damage control is to delete posts that threaten his credibility, objective and political viewpoint. Oh, and don't forget, he's willing to hide the name of an alleged identity theft if it suits his political agenda.
The home and host of ethics! The sad thing is, you don't even know better.
The Option was entered into by Bootjack, LLC. If the council or RDA Board wanted to know who owned Bootjack, LLC, they should have asked.
I've been told by Don Porter that the SE's position on controversial subjects is to wait until they have two opposing articles to run side by side.
Hard as I looked, I didn't see anything from the City Council or Doreen Jeske telling their side of things.
Do you think Bob Geiger has any sense of shame or indignation at being used as a mouthpiece by Matt? I wonder if the friendship will still hold after November when being a FOM won't get anyone anything.
Anon:
You asked if I want you to send me:
1) Information that this site is willing to protect the identity of identity theifs who use council member’s password protected blog identities to impugn Chris Peterson.
2) Information that Ms. Jeske’s password protected blog identity was used to unethically impugn Chris Peterson. (Her personal biography was attached.)
Thanks for the offer, but no thanks. Several reasons. First, I haven't read the post attributed to Ms. Jeske and so I don't know what it said. More generally than that, I don't know who most of the posters are here. It's an open blog. Generally, over time, I arrive at some conclusions about whose posts [under what pseudonymns] are worth taking seriously, and whose aren't. That's good enough for me. I presume most people who read the blog do that. If they don't, they should.
Identity theft on blogs is reprehensible and unconscionable. But I would be unable to determine if what you sent me was valid or not [technologically speaking, not suggesting manipulation on your part] so sending it wouldn't prove much to me either way.
Second: Have to tell you, I get tired rapidly of personal attacks on folks, or ad hominim attacks [and yes, these include attacks on the mayor's size, or Mr. Curt Geiger's occupation, neither of which have damn all to do with whether the gondola/gondola scheme is a good idea or not and so on, just by way of example]. Not being an attorney, I would not know if the alleged Jeske or hacker post constituted libel or not, so sending it along wouldn't be worth it.
If you've been reading here a while, you have to know I've spoken out here --- often --- against personal attacks as a tactic of discussion. I think, as it's called, the politics of personal distruction, is a serious danger to the kinds of public discussion that should go on, need to go on, in Ogden, in Utah, in the US. You have never seen me here accuse someone of being a crook, etc. I don't want to get involved in that sort of thing. Only two possible exceptions: (a)I have questioned the ethical conduct of some officials, but I've always included examples of the actions they took [or didn't take] that, I thought, justified what I said. And (b) I have called people Republicans which I suppose any reasonable person ought to consider defamatory.
In short, I really don't want to become part of a mud-slinging contest, even on the fringes. So thank you, but I will pass on your offer.
Here's a intersting anecdote,wethinks:
Several weeks ago we got back from a very long GOP meeting in SLC.
Upon our return late in the afternoon, we decided to turn on the TEEVEE, as many people do, when they're ready to unwind from a long day's efforts.
That day there was a pimple-faced kid from Annapolis on one of the "Discovry Channels," the "War Channel," we think. The guy in question we first saw on the tube looked about 13-years old, we swear.
The 1999 program topic was military academies in the US... US military schools.
We vaguely recognized the face; and we took a triple take, and then recognized the face on the third go-round. Little Bobby Geiger was on our TeeVee from the time of his miliatry years at Annapolis in 1999.
The specific topic of the program segemtn was ethics. The adolescnt-faced kid, was "Annapolis Cadet Bob Geiger."
The little shit waxxed on about "high ethics," right there on our own TeeVee.
He was at that time in charge of the Annapolis ethics committee, according to the 1999 video.
Seems that little Bobby may have lost touch and wavered recently from his Annapolis military roots.
He's schlepping Peterson and Godfrey right now incessantly.
We're wondering how his "ethics" became so screwed-up.
We want to know "what happened," so as he could compromise his ethics so much.
"What happened Bobby?" we ask.
Was it greed that convinced you to sell out your ethics?
Ego, perhaps?
What happened since Annapolis, we ask?
Forest Gump!
Remember when he smacked that foul mouthed, shaggy haired Burkley punk in the face?
I'm sure Bobby Geiger is sorry that he has messed up this sites' black panther party.
Dear Rudi
I question this as well.
Why in Annapolis did Generals and Admirals come to his lectures on ethics, while in Ogden he is considered so devoid of them.
Perhaps its the place not the time.
ANON
Bob Geiger here,
Just to let you know, when I visited Harvard, they threw stuff at me and on an interview on FOX one time, I was asked if Bill Clinton would have graduated from the Academy given his actions in oval office. They wouldn't have asked me that question, if they didn't have doubts themselves.
Discussions of ethics are received differently by different people and in different places.
That's how it goes though.
I've enjoyed today's discussion.
Rudi- At Annapolis we had a place for guys like you. It was called TANGO company. Call the Academy and ask about it.
OK... Tango company.
We're still wondering about your current ethics problem.
WTF happened, we ask?
Was Tango Company for trolls, or for sock puppets?
Obviously the mayor is in trouble.
Why else would these two Geiger guys come out of the woods (after not hearing from them for weeks if not months and then for only a single comment or two)to just try to antagonize the people of Ogden.
They somehow must feel that they need to protect the mayor or somehow dicredit the participants of this blog site. It one or the other.
It must be real slow selling ski wear these days because the Geigers have spent the last two days solid on their computers trying to rile up the people of Ogden on this blog site.
Also the little one, bobby, has written an awfully nasty note in the paper about our council members. Way to go, in developing good community relations for your company with the community that you live in and the city officials. I wonder if their company’s management has seen his letter in the local paper yet?
I wonder how their management feels about them spending their days doing all this blogging instead of selling the company products. By all the discounts going on in the sporting goods stores, I can’t believe that it’s been a very good year for companies in the ski industry. What's that military saying, when the going gets tough, the tough get blogging.
Most companies that I know expect their employees to put in an honest days work for an honest days pay.
Heard a rumor today the Chris Peterson was up at the Mt. Ogden Golf Course today running all around on ATV's with people from the city and others.
Does anyone know anything about this?
I think it is an interesting phycological phenomenon how a couple of good people with good ethics like the Geigers can sign on with someone like the Mayor. It might take them years before they realize how duped they were on this whole integrity issue by the mayor, but I think they eventually will get there.
Just as there where good and noble people caught up in the nazi movement, the Godfreyites have decent folk amongst them also.
I think the Geigers are OK, they just got caught up in a bad crowd and are just too close to the dazzle to see the truth - yet. Give em time.
Booby lost his integrity when he gave it all to the guy in the too big chair...the little guy with more integrity than anyone in the room.
Bill C...wish they'd shoot higher...like their mouths.
Aw, c'mon...Forrest Gump was sweet and charming, and unassuming. Even guilelessly told Pres. Kennedy he had 'to pee'. Bobby'll never be the hero soldier, businessman or gentleman that Forrest Gump was.
It's boring to have Bobby 'defending' his childish 'commentary'. Of the 60 some posts, he seems to have way over half here reiterating the same crap he had in the SE today. Still the pouty mean-mouthed little sanke he's always been.
Curt...does Bobby have a real job with you? How can he spend all day on this blog? Isn't business booming over at your place? Oh, I get it...he's DISpensable.
(Geez, Ozboy...your fairness is beginning to sound like Curmudgeon)
One our alert readers tipped us yesterday about developments at the Mt. Ogden Golf Course:
"Heard a rumor today the Chris Peterson was up at the Mt. Ogden Golf Course today running all around on ATV's with people from the city and others."
Sure enough, Scott Schwebke provides the low-down today.
CP was up there, along with Boss Godfrey and a "very famous" golf course designer.
Our readers will recall how Rupert Hertzig and Gadi Lesham were earlier billed as "very famous" Hollywood Directors and Producers.
Godfrey declined to disclose this designer's identity, surprise of surprises.
So who might this "renowned" designer be? Pete Dye? Jsck Nicklaus? Tripp Davis? Ron Garl, perhaps?
Don't bet on it.
We never cease to be amazed at the quality of the high-quality "intelligence" we receive through our readers here at Weber County Forum.
Rudizink:
Uh oh. The Mayor has refused to identify the "famous" golf course designer. Does that means the Mayor is about to sell some Ogden City public land to the designer he won't name? It would fit his modus operendi of late....
I saw a tiger in the woods and maybe that is the designer.
I didn’t come here today to bash the mayor but, why is everything so secretive with this mayor?
Where is the open government and why would he feel the need to protect the name of the "very famous" golf course designer?
Wouldn't the disclosure of that designer’s name add credence to his story especially if that designer was truly well known?
Hey Geiger, You may want to inform Chris that there are many more squirrels per acre in these lower elevation scrub oak covered foothills than he ever encountered at Snowbasin. With that military background Chris may consider you, to head up his next reincarnation of the "Squirrel Patrol".
To all the Anons -
Please figure out how to give yourself an alias so we can easily tell you apart from Bobby Geiger.
Click on "Other" and enter a name. I just did it to post this.
It's really not that hard. If you have no imagination, that shouldn't be OUR problem.
Anon 9:55
It has unfortunately been a hallmark of the Godfrey administration for a long time. One of the problems some council members had over the Ernest matter was that the administration kept the negotiations and much information that ought to have gone to the Council well in advance of the matter coming before them secret. And of course the recent "we can't tell you who we want to sell the land to." And of course presumably Mr. Peterson discussed with the Mayor what he planned to do with the three downtown parcels of RDA land he bought. But nobody else knows what those plans are. And the latest "hint" about the as yet-unseen Peterson proposal, that Peterson "may" have a plan that does not involve buying public land. That was over a month ago. Still nothing. It just keeps going on.
The really sad thing about this is it doesn't have to be this way. For a city to run well, there has to be a certain presumption of good will on both sides [legislative and executive]. That is hard to maintain in the face of constant secrecy about matters that ought not to be secret. And in the face of constant mis-information being passed from the Administration to the Council. [Three recent examples: the Shupe-Williams matter, the St. Anne's matter, and in the last ten days, Mr. Patterson told the Council that WACOG had voted not to endorse a transit corridor from downtown to WSU via Harrison. The Council had to ask staff to query WACOG about that vote, and were told by WACOG that no such vote had taken place, that WACOG had not refused to endorse that transit corridor. It just keeps going on.]
At this point, were I on the council, I would make it my practice to believe nothing I was told by Administrative spokesmen until I got it in writing. That is not a good situation to be in. And so far as I can see, much of the distrust has been needlessly generated by the Administrations almost pathological penchant for keeping secret what ought to be public. That's not good for the City. And it's not good for the Administration either. Add in letters [uncovered by GRAMA request] from Mr. Peterson's attorney, Mr. Ellison, writing to city staff in re: zoning changes Peterson wants made, saying it would be wise to do as much as possible without public scrutiny.
I wish I understood why secrecy plays so great a role in Godfrey's management style, especially since it seems routinely to blow up in his face to the administration's detriment. I wish I had a solution for it. I'm a puzzled by it as you are. But I can understand why people, myself among them, suspect that when a public official tries to hide what should not be hidden, he has a reason for doing it that will not [in his view] bear scrutiny.
Booby’s generally real easy to identify;
he's the one that can't do anything other than write one liners,
he's the one that generally asks questions rather than answers questions,
his questions are usually open ended questions that require a long response to clarify what someone is trying to specifically address within his question,
he’s the one that if given a good counter to his question refuses to acknowledge the responders answer and then two hours later asks the same question in a little different format,
And he’s the one that’s always got a negative slant on any answer given to any one of his questions when he chooses to respond.
Is it not possible that both the RDA board and the RDA director are to blame for their roles in the Wall St land sale? Yes, if it was important to the RDA board that they know who wanted to purchase the land and what the company intended to do with that land (which it ought to have been) then they should not have approved the sale. Moreover, the RDA director's office should not have withheld the info that was requested just because they thought it would be too controversial to release that info. That is not their call. I'm disgusted with both parts of my city government.
even steven
i think your comments are valid and i agree with your conclusion
its time to stop finger pointing and fix the problem
what needs to happen now is that rules need to be put in place that prevents just such a thing from happening again
I've yet to read anything on this blog, such as a statute or regulation, that verifies the City has done anything wrong regarding Bootjack, LLC. What I've read so far is opinion, not fact. I wonder if any of you know what the City must do when it sells a piece of property? From what I've read, I think the answer is "nope."
But damn, this is fun, isn't it, reading all of these theories and assumptions about all involved or imagined to be involved. A good fictional novel could come from some of this stuff that the WCF provides.
We have bobby back with a new style but the same atitude
now we know why bobby could spend all day on this blog yesterday! His daddy was probably dashing around with their crony CP, THE mayor and the 'famous' designer!
Sure hope they weren't in danger of causing an avalanche on Malan's as they were zipping around in those ATV's.
Sad, VERY sad.
The squeaky-clean "ethics guy" from Annapolis in 1999...
Has now become a compliant Godfrey Gopher.
Go figure.
I think Bill O'Reilly should have Bobby on Fox News and thump some ethics into him....wha' happened ??is right.
Tango Company? Is that like Dancing with the "don't ask, don't tell" sweeties?
I appreciate the article from Scott Schwebke, but I have a few comments I’d like him to consider, along the lines of being more objective.
Given that the mayor refused to answer any of your questions, why did you, Scott, state as fact that a “renowned designer” toured the course and that this designer will “formulate recommendations” when these are not facts but merely statements from Godfrey? Given that they are only that, why didn’t you state them as such? How about you just write the article and state what you know, what Godfrey said if you want, and then note that he “refused” to give any details when asked, instead of weaving information into your article as fact when you had no proof of any of it at all?
Why do you, Scott, continue to state as fact that Peterson “plans” and “wants” to do this or that, when there is nothing to indicate what he plans or wants at all?
You note that the mayor said it will take time for Peterson’s plans to be formulated. Why not point out that it’s been over a year that he’s been saying that? Who paid for this little excursion, Peterson, or the city? Is Peterson doing anything at all besides mooching off the Mayor? Why don’t you ever ask these things?
Scott, you do very little in many of your articles besides parrot whatever the mayor wants you to print. That’s bad enough, but given that when you ask legitimate questions and all he does is blow you off, tell me man, what does it take to get your dander up?
Other reporters seem to be able to report both sides of the story, why not you? Other reporters seem curious, why not you? Other reporters get tired of being played by politicians, why not you?
I know you’re a small timer, Scott, but why act like it? Dig a little. Hard work never hurt anybody.
Good advice, Scott.
A first rate reporter always ASKS...ASKS SOME MORE and is ready with the follow-up questions.
Please stop running that old file material of Godfrey's plan for the gondola!
Take the above suggestions and become a real reporter. Heaven knows the SE needs one.
You might even find yourself ready for primetime: The SL TRIB or the DES NEWS!
You know there is plenty of corruption in this administration...how about ferreting out what you don't already know and inform the citizens of this area?
We have a right to know and you have an obligation to tell it like it is.
Thank you.
once a marine asked:
"Tango Company? Is that like Dancing with the 'don't ask, don't tell' sweeties?"
No, Bobby was trying to insult Rudi. It wasn't a very good insult, and it missed the mark in any case.
Tango Company is where the young men and women who are unsure of their future are "parked" while they consider whether they want to be Naval Academy cadets.
I imagine Bobby was trying to say Rudi was a loser, but it was a pretty witless insult.
Did they teach you how to make sock puppets in Annapolis?
Monotreme finds it rather easy to write about himself in the third person. It throws people off. He's just not unethical enough to use different identities to make it look like people are agreeing with him.
Touche! Monotreme.
Somebody give the kid a new pacifier.
I read with interest the article in today's S-E: "FrontRunner generates excitement, skepticism" (Sunday, Mar 4 2007, page 1C.)
(I can't make the hyperlink work. Sorry.)
Here's a couple of concepts, right from our neighbors in Clearfield:
1. Show the public plans for what you are going to do with the land adjacent to the FrontRunner station.
2. Say, clearly and publicly, "we're looking for a developer to help us with these plans".
The city government of Clearfield must be incredibly backward. The Ogden City Oligarchy-cum-Republic knows how to do this! Sell valuable property to a would-be developer under the table! Tell all and sundry we have a "famous" person doing the golf course design but don't reveal the design, or the name of the person!
I have so much to learn about how a Republic works. I guess I just didn't pay enough attention in school.
I suppose all this touring of the golf course is preparatory to a back-door, under-the-table transaction that will transfer the city's property to some would-be developer.
To bobby Geiger,
I now have a better understanding as to what some of the privileges of bring a SOB (son of the boss) are, i.e. blogging all day. Son, you really were hitting the keyboard hard on Thursday and Friday. Most of the rest of us have real jobs that require us to put in the hours to get the work done. You must not. Don’t you ever get bored or do you just go into the back of the shop and try on all the newest clothes to see which outfits are your favorites or which outfit accents your physical attributes the best? I just curious, do you try on the clothes first or do you go to the computer keyboard first or do you put on the clothes and then go to the keyboard? Tell us. We gotta know. It's IMPORTANT! I guess nepotism fits you well.
Bobby,
I thought Annapolis was for people that wanted to make a life out of being in the military?
Why aren't you still there? Didn't they want you and/or were you in the TANGO company?
T temper tantrums
A angst
N nonage
G guile
O obnoxious
These are the apparent attributes of Bobby Geiger....there are other words spelling TANGO to define Bobby.
Playing on the computer whilst daddy is hobnobbing with his buddy and the unnamed 'famous designer' is how he defines his very important position as CEO of Descente Ogden.
Why DIDN'T you stay in the Navy? The structure and discipline would have made a man of you. Also the proximity of the brig would have enhanced your maturity and taught you to think before you spout off.
SL Magazine Take on the Godfry Goofy Flatland Gondola
In a desperate, and probably forlorn, attempt to shift the conversation off Mr. Geiger's [or anyone else's] military career and other irrelevencies for the topic under discussion, let me offer this....
Down in SLC last night to hear Roger Kahn [author of The Boys of Summer and many other sports histories --- who was born and raised in Brooklyn, NY, by the way, as all the best people are] speak, I came across the10th Annual Awards Issue of Salt Lake magazine... the current issue with the sushi chef on the cover. Inside, an article by one Jeremy Pugh, entitled "25 Things We Love About Northern Utah." Number 8 was:
Historic 25th Street. Ogden, what are we going to do with you? Gondolas from the town square? At least we can count on 25th Street to remind us what a cool place Utah's second city can be. Tattoo parlors mingle with antique boutiques. Quench your thirst at Roosters."
Hmmmmm.... Salt Lake [to which I do not subscribe... bought this one at Sam Weller's] seems, from its ads and articles, to be aimed at exactly the upscale well-heeled big-spender clientele the Gondolistas claim will follow the Mayor's little dangling gondolas to downtown Ogden. Seems instead what the idea is producing is disblief and snickers among the very set the Gondolistas think will love it.
Imagine that....
Everyone that looks at the urban gondola concept and the idea of reducing the amount of open space within the city just think these ideas are silly.
The gondola isn't viewed as anything other than a gimick and the idea of reducing open space within the city is moving against the current of what every other community is doing.
If the people that supported this idea in the first place would just relax for a little and realize how much more support they would get for their concept if the just took the urban gondola and the open space off the table so to speak.
Both sides in these issues would then be able to come together and there probably is still a project to be had.
"If the people that supported this idea in the first place would just relax for a little and realize how much more support they would get for their concept if the just took the urban gondola and the open space off the table so to speak."
Sounds good, but I think the idea is for FOM to scam as much money as possible off the lumpenproletariat before Matt has to vacate City Hall.
monotrme, it would appear that Clearfield does things quite a lot different than Ogden. You recall that their Mayor resigned in February 2006 after little more than a month in office after it was discovered he had visited porn sites on his city laptop. A somewhat similar event allegedly occured in Ogden, which then Human Resouce Director Dean Martinez was investigating, but the Ogden story also contained multiple sexual harrasment complaints,Martinez told the Salt Lake Tribune.Martinez was promptly fired and the situation was spun into a racial discrimination issue about Martinez.The Standard Examiner article at the time took exactly that angle for the story. Standard Examiner reporter Schwebke appears to have been satisfied with the administrations remarks at that time when John Patterson responded that the investigation was closed regarding the allegation of a female subordinates' complaint of sexual harrasment against a male division manager who still works for the city. Patterson offered that it had been determined that it had been a consensual relationship and the issue was resolved when the pair were ordered to "cease" the relationship.The Schwebke article made no mention of porn on city computers,or multiple sexual harrasment complaints. The Tribune article brought up all of this and reads as if the reports are about two completely different occurences. Clearfield appears alot more open to the public, and it looks like that openness is the demarcation line of probing for our local paper.
Heard at church today: "Ogden is in the Wall Street Journal! For all the ski companies coming here and Ogden is going to be the ski capital of the west!"
so weary:
Not being a subscriber to what likes to call itself "the daily diary of the American dream," I haven't read the piece. If you [or anyone else] has a link that doesn't lead behind a subscription wall, or can post significant parts of the article, I'd appreciate it.
Interesting that the summary you heard says the WSJ's interest in Ogden was sparked by "all the ski companies coming here." While the Official Line of the Godfrey Goofly Flatland Gonolistas is that Ogden is in the WSJ "because of the gondola." Be nice to see the article and see what the WSJ actually said.
I guess it's worth noting yet again that having outdoor sports-oriented companies [not just ski companies] come to Ogden is a very good idea. Which does not, of course, necessarily involve having the Godfrey Goofy Flatland Gondola come to town and the public parklands sold for residential development to an FOM, however much the Goldolistas want to pretend the two [Ogden an outdoor sports mecca and the flatland gondola/ Peterson land speculation scheme] are joined at the hip.
Curmudgeon
Your bias is hanging out the back of your drawers Curm.
A couple posts back you said:
"born and raised in Brooklyn, NY, by the way, as all the best people are"
Did you mean to include those two famous crooks Al Capone and Matt Godfrey? Al was definately born there, and Matt is one of the "best people" therefore must also be a Brooklyn bum. While Al was much more honest than Matt, they were both gangsters in their own right.
lionel:
You need to read more carefully. I said all the best people are born and raised in Brooklyn [which of course is irrefutable]. I did not say "all the people born and raised in Brooklyn are among the best people." Any herd produces a few cutters and canners.
Don't feel bad, lionel. Not everyone can have been born and raised in Brooklyn. I know, I know, what can I say? Sometimes, life is unfair.... [grin]
I think "so weary" just wants everyone to see that his name is in the WSJ. Got some news for you, I've been referenced in the WSJ in the past as well but I'm not as impressed with myself for that honor as you are.
By the way, I wasn't identified as the son of the boss either.
Anon:
Do you have a link by which we could all reach the article?
I got it in hard copy and don't have a scanner
we'll figure something out though
Curmudgeon
Said like a true bridge salesman from Brooklyn! With skill like that you could make it as mayor around here!!
Anon
What the hell are you talking about? First of all, you don't know my name, so why would you say I was mentioned in the Wall Street Journal??
What are you smoking? Did you post just to tell us that YOU'VE been 'referenced' in the WSJ? Without a name, who cares?
I SAID that I was told today that OGDEN is in the WSJ. DUH
My name ain't Ogden. Sober up.
So Weary:
Sounds like an honest mistake to me! After all there was a guy around here a while back by the name of "Ogden" who operated very much like the Geigers and the Mayor. His name was Wayne Ogden as I recall. He would have fit right in with this bunch of wanna be big shots that are constantly scamming on the good folks of Ogden's wallets.
I would suppose that when old Wayne gets out of the joint the Mayor and his sycophants the Geigers will be welcoming him with wide open arms!
Anon 10:12
I found a copy. Thank you for looking for one for me.
mhzxpu....is your name pronounced mizpoo?
Cute
Jest wondering:
Actually, it's pronounced "mish-pwa" in the French version. [grin]
Damn. mhzxpu should have been "Curmudgeon". Evidently I typed the random letter verification string in the "name" box. Ah, well. Win a few, lose a few...
109 posts! Wow!
Anyone catch the Wall Street Journal article about the Gondola and the rejuvenation of Ogden City?
How does "Little Bobby" pull that off?
Yes, I saw the article and it put Ogden in a very good light. I personally like seeing our city getting the attention that its due. I realized the beauty of the community myself when I moved here a while ago.
Unfortunately the mayor wants to put all of our eggs in one basket and he wants to leverage the city fianacials to the point that if things don't happen in the expected time frame or the project isn't as successful as envisioned, then we, the people of Ogden, will never be able to recover.
If Ogden had a city budget of a quarter of a billion dollars a year it would be one thing but we just don't and we need to slow down or do things in a less grandious scale.
I also feel that the loss of our open space for this project would be a crime, that space is part of what makes Ogden, Ogden.
But yes, I'm was glad to see our city being recognized as a beautiful community wit a lot of potential.
anon:
Well, I'd agree if the article had not {a} implied that the "secluded" Malan's Basin Resort was already in existance and had not {b} said the Mayor's plan involves a single gondola connecting downtown with Malan's Basin [instead of one flatland gondola 4.3 miles long to WSU, and then another about 2 miles long to Malans]. {c}And if it had accurately reported the extent of the land the Mayor wants to sell, rather than dismissing it as "some hiking land." And (d) it had not reported that the up to $50 million it would take to build city end of the gondola would be "financed" by the developer, which [unless the reporter saw a revised plan from Godfrey that no one else has yet seen] is flaty untrue. [The last we heard from the mayor, the plan was for the city to take the proceeds from selling the golfcourse and other land to Peterson an use that to fund as much of the city end of the gondola as it will, and to rely on "private" sources, as yet unidentified, to pick up the rest.]
The "article" [politely so called] was so larded with inaccuracies and untruths, I'm hard put to think of it as a boon to the city overall.
Wonder how many WSJ readers will call local hotels, seeking to book a room and a lift ticket for the "secluded Malan's Basin ski resort."
It's just PR crap put out by the Geigers'.....
If that reporter was really here as Dan has reported, he's pretty bad.
Maybe the three G's bot him a few drinks and dinner??
At any rate, he's not worth much as a reporter, and showed a lack of objectivity and character that fits hand in glove with the three G's.
New comments are not allowed.