And some soothing words of encouragement to our gondolist neighbors
Ace Reporter Schwebke delivers a heart-rending front-page story this morning, reporting on the reaction in the gondolist cult camp to Saturday's five-star rated Boss Godfrey flip-flop.
The loyal gondolist lemmings had campaigned tirelessly for Boss Godfrey over the last two years, hoping to wrench seed money from the sale of our cherished Mt. Ogden parklands acreage, to be applied as a down payment toward their cherished amusement park ride to nowhere.
They're feeling more than slightly "let down" by Boss Godfrey, to say the very least, according to Ace reporter Schwebke, although even now they maintain "hope."
Amazingly, the plainly disappointed Curt Geiger even lets slip a telling amusement park metaphor with this curt statement: "The brass ring on the carousel went past us,” Geiger said, “and we didn’t grab hold of it."
Perhaps the amateur psychologists among us can provide some enlightenment on the true meaning of this.
And the usually upbeat Dave Hardman, President of the Weber/Ogden Chamber of Commerce, utters a crack that's positively nasty, in the context of his constantly grinning, Enzyte-guy normal demeanor. "It would be dumb of our community to miss this opportunity,” Mr. Hardman snapped.
Maybe it's just us -- but we are curious as to our readers' impressions of the possibly subtle meaning of this Dave Hardman comment. Did Dave Hardman actually tell Scott Schwebke that he thought Boss Godfrey's latest decision was dumb?
And courtesy of gentle reader Dan S. we refer our readers to this morning's most excellent Kathy McKittrick story on this topic. As Dan S. notes, the hiring of Ms. McKittrick by the Salt Lake Tribune was clearly Emerald City's loss, and Salt Lake City's profound gain.
But before we turn the floor over to our readers this morning, we're going to offer a few words of consolation to our poor Emerald City brethren who feel betrayed by the "visionary" leader who apparently "hears voices" of conflicting "instruction" from time to time:
1) Remember, when Boss Godfrey makes a promise while his lips are moving, you can expect his actual behavior to be the dead opposite of what he says. Based on careful observation of the Boss of Us All for almost eight years, we're going to go out on a limb and predict he'll in all likelihood sell the park to Chris Peterson anyway -- win or lose or lose the election -- shortly after the November polling date. If the little guy can unabashedly do an 180 degree flip-flop once, he can most certainly do it again. That's one thing you can definitely take to the bank.
2) And even assuming the low-probability alternative, i.e., that Boss Godfrey is breaking new ground -- and actually telling the truth at long last -- our despondent gondolist friends and neighbors should be reminded that the paltry $2-7 million that Godfrey expected to generate from the Mt. Ogden Parklands sale was just a drop in the bucket when compared with the $45 million projected urban gondola price-tag. Loyalist gondolists would have been compelled to beat the bush for another $38 million in investment capital anyway, even if Godfrey hadn't pulled the old last-minute political "switcheroo." Accordingly, the additional $7 mil is just "chump change" with regard to a wonderful project like this. We're sure eager investors will be beating down gondolist fundraiser doors with bags of investor cash, in order to get in on the ground floor of a sure-fire investment like this.
We do hope that our gondolist friends feel better now. As always, we're trying to "stay positive."
Take it away o gentle ones.
© 2005 - 2014 Weber County Forum™ -- All Rights Reserved
37 comments:
Curmudgeon said...
I noticed some other things in Mr. Schwebke's article this morning. This in particular caught my eye:
Peterson said in an e-mail Saturday to the Standard-Examiner that... he believes a gondola would be successful in connecting downtown to a resort he has proposed at Malan’s Basin.
“I believe more than ever that, for short, straight transit routes, a gondola is an exceptionally efficient way to move- passengers,” he said.
Huh? The city gondola would run four miles plus, and go through two right angle turns between downtown and WSU. Seems to violate both of the conditions Mr. Peterson says gondolas should meet: short straight routes. Or was he talking there only about his proposed up-mountain gondola from WSU to Malan's Basin? The Schwebke story and the people he quotes seem use "the gondola" interchangeably to mean either the downtown to WSU flatland city gondola or the WSU to Malan's Basin Peterson-built gondola, or both. It can be confusing... and deceptive. I still think the Mayor and his supporters' constant reference to "the" gondola when they mean two separate gondola systems [one public, one private] is done deliberately with the intention of confusing public understanding of what their plans involve.
Here's a good example of that: However, the gondola resort project could still come to fruition if Peterson can find a way to pay for it, Godfrey said. Meaning Peterson has to find a way to pay for the up mountain gondola to the resort... or for the city flatland gondola from WSU to downtown too? What exactly does "the gondola" mean in the Mayor's sentence above? One of them? Two? Impossible to tell.
And this: Mike Ostermiller, chief executive officer of the Weber/ North Davis Association of Realtors and a gondola supporter, doesn’t think Godfrey’s decision is politically motivated. He believes the mayor is trying to win increased public support for the gondola resort project by taking Mount Ogden Golf Course out of the equation.
Really? Has there been much public opposition to Mr. Peterson building a resort in Malan's Basin on his own land with his own money? I haven't noticed much. And what "gondola" does Mr. Ostermiller mean in his statement? One from the head of say 36th Street to Malan's Basin? Or the one from downtown to WSU? Or both? Impossible to tell. I wonder if Mr. Ostermiller knows what he meant?
Finally, this from Mr. Schwebke's story: The decision not to sell Mount Ogden Golf Course represents a setback but not necessarily a death knell for the project, which a 2006 city commissioned study estimated would generate for local governments more than $89 million in tax revenue over 10 years.
Well, actually, no, the study did not say the projects would generate $89 million in tax revenues over ten years. The study assumed all the figures, estimates and assumptions provided by the city to the consultants --- unverified, uncorroborated and unaccompanied by feasiblity studies or market studies --- and concluded that if all of those numbers were accurate, then the various projects might generate $89 million over a decade.
A more accurate way to have put it might have been this: ...which a 2006 city commissioned study estimated might generate for local governments as much as $89 million in tax revenue over 10 years. Quibbling? Possibly, but I don't think so. The consultants went out of their way to note the conditional nature of their conclusions, and to note the fact that they were instructed to accept all the numbers provided by the city as accurate, and to question or examine none of them. Substituting "might" for "would" and adding "as much as" would have, I think more accurately reflected the conditional nature of the study's conclusions. Since most people who read Mr. Schwebke's story will not have read the consultant's report, they will leave his story with the impression that the consultants said the various schemes "would" generate $89 million. The consultant's report said nothing of the kind.
And finally, from the SL Trib story, this:
Councilman Brandon Stephenson wants Peterson to craft a detailed, albeit-scaled-back plan.
Stephenson, who backs the idea of running a gondola from downtown to WSU and then up to the proposed Malans Basin resort, figures Peterson now will have to approach the sky ride from a different tack.
"That now depends on the developer," he said. "Any good businessman could make it work."
Stephenson, Mayor Godfrey's dependable sock-puppet on the Council thinks "any good businessman could make" the Peterson plan work. Interesting. Perhaps Mr. Stephenson might like to explain then why Mr. Peterson has apparently had no luck attracting investment capital for his scheme from the usual places: banks, pension funds, venture capital groups, etc. If this is such a dead certain stunning success, why did Peterson have to rely on having the city sell him, very cheaply, its parklands so he could make millions on developing them as residential properties in order to get the funds needed to build his Malan's Basin resort and up mountain gondola? Surely a project so certain of success that "any good business man could make it work" would have investors clammoring at the doors, demanding a piece of the action. But, oddly, that seems not to have happened. Imagine that.
Perhaps Mr. Stephenson's constituents --- he is running for re-election --- might be interested in finding a council member more interested in dealing with the city's ballooning debt, or dealing with its declining water and sewer systems, rather than spending so much of his time touting a Mr. Peterson's proposed resort at Malan's Basin that he can't seem to find investors for. And possibly his constituents might want to find a councilman capable, at least some of the time, of independent thought.
I will say, however, that the Mayor has perfected one talent: ventriliquism. I've attended Council meetings and when Mr. Stephenson speaks, you can't see the Mayor's lips moving at all.
I call B.S. on the park being the "Central Park" of Ogden. It is mostly a golf course that a majority of Ogden residents don't use. I'm not pro-selling the area, but lets call it what it is: mostly a golf course that residents can't use in the summer unless they like chasing their balls and if we want to call it something different, lets use it that way.
Perhaps buying up a bunch of land in central Ogden and making a "Central Park" would be a good idea.
Cheers:
Have you been to the park much? It involves a great deal more than just a golf course. I don't play golf [and generally question the sanity of those who do], but I'm up on the lands the mayor wanted to sell at Mt. Ogden all the time, walking on the trails, in all seasons. And the trails in good weather --- the lower trails on the lands the Mayor wanted to sell --- seem to be pretty heavily used most of the times I'm there... unless I get out just about dawn to beat the rush. In this past year alone, I've met and chatted with, on those trails on the land the mayor wanted to make over into a gated community of upscale homes, people from all over the Wasatch Front [from as far south as Provo], from all over the state [from as far as St. George] and from all over the country [from, recently, California, New York and Missouri].
The notion that all the mayor was trying to sell to his accomplice [at "open land" prices for subsequent development as residential land] was the golf course is simply not true.
In your exuberance to celebrate what you take for a major victory, you people are missing the point.
The crux of Godfrey's new position is that Peterson can't shoehorn 200 homes into the park property.
But what about 100 homes? What about 150? What about 199?
Plug in $1 million per home and do the math.
Be careful everyone.
You're about to be slicked by a very crafty man.
Curm yes I've been to the "park" and a majority of it is golf course. Where did I say that he was just trying to sell was golf course? I'm not sure where you read
that into my statement.
My point is the golf course is not public access and when you cross-country ski and sled on the course in the winter your are in fact breaking the (unenforced) law.
All I'm saying is if you want to call it Central Park, Make it Central Park. Otherwise say, "as a Council Woman, I'm proud that we will continue city golf course. And to take it a step further, I hope we continue to have access to what some would call Ogden's premier hike, Waterfall Canyon."
Anyway, I've met plenty of people from all over on Mr. Peterson's private land too...it will be interesting to decide if he decides to close access or sell it to someone who will.
Curm,
I've very much enjoyed your posts this morning! Imagine that.
We drove our daUghter-in-law and g'dtr to the Mount Ogen park, and golf course..the whole shebang...the other nite and they were enthralled.
If they could have visited with us longer, they would have hiked the trails.
They were enchanted with the whole area and aghast at Godfrey/Peterson/Ellison/Geigers', et al scheme to wrest it all away from us.
We drove them to the Junction. They were underwhelmed and commented that the architect (?) must have thot he was erecting another Temple...with one right next door. So gaudy. So garish.
So, Godfrey now his legacy at the Junction. Maybe Dowse will take down the SALOMEN CENTER sign and let GODFREY'S GRANDIOSITY be put up there instead?
Even the very first article proclaiming that Mount Ogden 'off the hook" was disingenuous.
Godfrey said right in there that the deal wasn't really over.
He's just waiting 'for Chris to go back to the drawingboard'.
The reason the LO Chorus isn't wailing, but just mewling, is becauSe they have helped Matt craftily craft a campaign strategy to lull us into the showers...uh...the gas chambers.
I loved your tag line, Curm...about Godfrey's ventriloquism...and his lips not moving when Stephenson speaks. Priceless.
Well, the little entertainer has lots of lips moving even when they aren't sitting on his knee, but in his pocket.
Come on, Amy...you, Susie, Doug, and Jesse link arms with Jeske and get that amendment passed pronto to take back your authority that the pantywaist council handed to Godfrey. Get an atty, of YOUR choosing, who will draft the ironclad ordinance to put all our parks and golf courses out of the reach of any mayor, developer, REzoning, etc in perpetuity!
Serious about saving Mount Ogden? Let's see some fast action.
NEVER TRUST....VERIFY
Is it true that Van Hooser is going to run for mayor?!!?
The woman has no experience, and isn't sure of her votes on the council half the time. If we want another inept mayor we can keep the one we have. Who knows her? Tell her to stay on the Council and learn the job.
cheers:
Please cite the alleged law that one is breaking when skiing or sledding on the golf course in winter. I very much doubt that there is such a law, but I'm willing to be educated.
say it isn't so-
What do you mean exactly when you say Van Hooser has no experience? What qualifies as experience when running for Mayor? Just curious. IMHO, from what I know of her she would be a perfectly cabable person at the job. Sounds like you're a bit worried, you're not from the Godfrey or Hansen camp are you? I haven't heard that she is running, but I would be very happy to hear her declare her candidacy.
I guess that if you like someone for the mayors job, tell like it is why is it that she would be the person for that job. I bet the cons out way the pros. so please tell us Jill.
Dan S.
I don't have time to do all of the research for you....but it is a zoning law.
You and I can't go sit on hole # 3 and have lunch together this afternoon because it is a golf course. We can't go lay there together and look at the stars tonight either, even though the course is closed. Just because it is dark doesn't been it is public access. The fact that there is snow on the course in January doesn't make it public access either.
But if you want to have lunch or hang out under the stars, it would be nice. I could careless about the golfers and the course I subsidize for them.
Geez, is Cheers straight? Be careful, Dan!
Jill...yeah, tell us all about Van Hooser's qualifications for the job.
cheers: What do you mean, my research? The burden of proof lies on you, my friend.
I'm sure you're right about being on the golf course when it's open for golfing. And all the city's developed parks, I think, have curfews after dark. But as far as I know, the city encourages winter recreation on the course as long as there's sufficient snow to protect the greens.
anon: Gee, I guess you're right. Without the gondola, Ogden has absolutely nothing. No jobs, no shopping, no restaurants, no museums, no hotels, no historic buildings, no nice residential neighborhoods, no schools, no scenery, no recreational opportunities. Guess I might as well pick up and move.
p.s. Read the wcforum policy and make up an alias for yerself.
As a new resident, I was exited about the shot in the arm the gondola could give the area. Those so elated about the possible end of the project, what now? what can boost Ogden's economy? Ogden needs something, it lags behind the vibrant economies of other areas of Utah.
Also, be realistic, we are not talking about a "crown jewel park". I have hiked there, cycled above it, walked the dog around there many times and rarely seen more than 4 other people. Folks are being dishonest about this park's current value to our community.
And the lemmings reference. It seems to me that those who choose to walk the same path every season and fear change are much more like lemmings than those who are willing to work for change.
July 10, 2007 1:47 PM
Reposted
Anon:
You've never met more than four people on the park trails? Please let me know when you do your walking. I'd love to be out there with that few people around.
Mrs. Curmudgeon took Stupid Dog for a walk up in the park this morning. She met on this short walk [less than a mile. Much less] over a dozen people.
How many I meet depends on the season and how far I'm going. But it's nearly never less than half a dozen and is usually more.
The trails extend through part of the area designated "golf course" and through part of the adjoining 60 acres of city land. Godfrey wanted to sell all of it to his friend.
By the way, I can't think of a single park in Ogden... or in any other city I've lived in, by the way... that a majority of the residents use. So if that's the standard --- use by a majority of city residents --- we couldn't justify any parks in Ogden.
In some recent articles and posts here I've read that the whole gondola plan was initially Godfrey's and that he approached Chris Peterson. Then I read that Peterson approached Godfrey. I'm just curious, does anyone know which is correct or is it a mixture of the two?
Formerly Anon:
You wrote: As a new resident, I was exited about the shot in the arm the gondola could give the area.
OK, FA, perhaps you can explain your apparent certainty... or if that's too strong, confidence... that the gondola/gondola/resort scheme had a snowball's chance in hell of succeeding? Particularly since to date... two years into the proposal being unveiled by the Mayor and Mr. Peterson... we've seen exactly no feasibility studies on the economic viability of a very small ski resort tucked into Malan's Basin, or on the economic viability of the city gondola... or for that matter, of the proposed Peterson up-mountain gondola. Or even a market study on the marketability of a200/400/600 [the number kept changing] unit Vacation Villa community on the east bench?
One measure of economic viability [not perfect, but one measure] is whether the market is willing to invest in a project, is sure enough of its probable success that people will put their own and their clients' money into it. We've seen no indication in two years now that investors are eager to put their own or their clients' money into the Peterson Malan's Basin project. [That's why he needed to buy the city land at the low "open space zoned" rate, and have the zoning changed to "residential" and to then develop the property... to raise the money he needed to build is Malan's Resort and up-mountain gondola.]
I am truly puzzled by the nearly blind faith so many seem to have that this Rube-Goldberg pastiche of many projects --- a four mile plus city build gondola, a two mile private mountain gondola, a huge real estate development on the benches, a mini-Ski Resort [with no connection to Snow Basin] offering few runs on a very small area of land ---- all of which had to succeed for any of them to be successful --- would work out. Ogden would have had to hit a Trifecta Plus One to come out ahead.
It seems so far, based on the evidence we seen, that all the proponents have is "a concept." With nearly no evidence to support its viability. So I am, truly, curious why you... and you are not alone... are so confident this would all work out.
Particularly since there is an alternative to the city participation in this with a proven record of generating billions [with a b] of investment and development in mid sized cities: street car transit [which the only people to actually study it... the Wasatch Front Regional Council... recommended as the best transit option for Ogden over the route from downtown to WSU and McKay Dee... and as a newcomer, you may not be aware that the WFRC study did include looking at a gondola instead of a streetcar.]
So, serious question: wherefor your confidence when, to date, we've seen nothing substantive to back up the feasibility of the grand plan in all its parts, or the probability of its succeeding?
Sorry Dan, I wasn't implying who was responsible for getting the research. I was saying I don't have time to provide that service right now.
And I agree, that the City does encourage usage in the Winter. In fact, I believe bought a snowmobile for grooming ski trails. That doesn't make it legal according to current zoning.
Ok, I will continue your logic a bit more then. I pretty sure they don't let anyone tee off after 9 p.m. and Ogden City Park Curfew is 10 p.m. Lets party (ride our bikes, eat a sandwich, play in the sprinklers, whatever) on hole one tonight at 9 p.m. and see if anyone cares.
OgLover:
I think the chronology went something like this. Over two years ago... well over... Godfrey proposed a gondola to connect downtown Ogden with Snow Basin. A support group called Lift Ogden was immediately formed to push for it. I attended their early meetings.
The original concept was a city gondola to WSU where it would connect with the base station of a tram [like at SnowBird or Albuquerque... in fact in an early article in the SE, Mr. Chapman, an early Lift Ogden backer, held up the Albuquerque tram as the model for Ogden].
Then Lift Ogden shifted to the idea of a gondola as its over-mountain system instead of a tram, again connecting dowtown with Snow Basin via WSU and the proposed city gondola. But suddenly, the wheels came off the plan when Snow Basin Management made it plainly, brutally clear that Snow Basin was not interested in either a tram or gondola link between its upper slopes and Ogden City.
At that point, the Peterson Proposal emerged in the form we have all become familiar with: sale of the city parklands to Peterson to re-design the golf course in order to make room for [initially] 400 or so vacation villa fairway view vacation homes in a gated community], a city-built gondola to WSU, where Mr. Peterson would build another gondola from WSU up mountain to his proposed Malan's Basin Resort. The flagging enthusiasm of Lift Ogden was rekindled, and the last two years began.
Who went to who? Beats me. But I think the chronology above is largely right. Tec was with LO in the early days. Maybe he can corroborate or correct it if I'm wrong.
Curm, surely you know better than to rely on memory regarding matters of history!
Ogdenlover (and Curm), please see this page for a more accurate (and more complete) summary. Be sure to click on the "tram tiff" news article to see Peterson's name in the rightmost column.
The record clearly shows that Godfrey and Peterson have been working together on gondola schemes for over seven years. In 2000 the plan was a gondola in Taylor Canyon, with buses to connect downtown to the gondola base station. The urban gondola idea was being seriously considered as early as 2002. Lift Ogden wasn't organized until late 2004, about two months before Peterson bought the Malan's Basin property.
Of course, we need to connect a lot of dots to get a complete picture. It seems highly likely, though not certain, that Godfrey and Allen knew of Peterson's planned purchase of the Malan's Basin property when Lift Ogden was formed. It also seems likely that the plan to sell Peterson the city's foothill property dates back to approximately 2004. But we can't really be sure.
I suppose we could also consider what Godfrey and Peterson have publicly said about the origin of the idea. I don't have the exact quotes handy, but each has made statements implying that the project was the other's idea. I guess we can take these statements for what they're worth.
another great idea and say it so-
She has actually done a lot in this community (I’ve personally worked with her on at least 3 different fronts), including doing a fairly decent job as a “rookie” on the City Council. I’m not going to spend much time right now defending her. I may be more willing to do that if and when (hopefully) she makes it official and decides to run. If she chooses not to run, then so be it. I just think she would add a strong voice to the fray. I’m not saying Hansen and Godfrey (although that hurts to admit) aren’t capable, but it’s my gut reaction that Van Hooser would be a better choice. Of course, I wouldn’t make my mind up until I heard from all of the candidates. But given the choices and knowing what I know right now, I would have to say Van Hooser. This is all rather nonsense, though, as she hasn’t announced anything.
Overall, I do feel, though, that instead of discouraging people from entering the race, seeing as this is the final week of filing and Ogden’s future may be in the balance (the next 4 years are very important for Ogden as key decisions are being made and projects are plowing ahead), that we need more candidates who will be willing to jump in the mix and give us their vision (I use that term although I really do hate it) of what Ogden should be and do and how they will lead us there.
formerly anonymous is right. without the gondola ogden is sunk. i hear that Amer sports is reconsidering moving here and that descente is looking for a city that believes in economic progress (re: gondolas).
Worried,
Just whom do you hear this from? Is he on the 9th floor or across the street in the Descente offices?
Og:
I think Worried was being sarcastic in his post.... As Amer execs made clear in the recent SL Trib story, they reasons they moved to Ogden were lower costs of doing business, affordable housing for their staff, and proximity to the mountains... including an olympic ski venue half an hour a way, water sports less than that away, hiking and biking trailheads fifteen minutes away, and climbing areas not much further off, plus the river right downtown. Nothing about a gondola as a motive for coming here. Not a word.
Worried...
I so wish you were'nt just spewing BS, and that Geiger really was packing up his bags and his eight jobs and leaving. His logic, his manner, and his derisive attitude toward anyone who disagrees with him has been divisive to say the least. I dare say his absence in this town would noticably improve civility.
Wish him the very best for us wherever he lands and here's to the door not hitting his backside on the way out.
Sheesh!
Ogdenlover,
I found the Godfrey quote, from his guest commentary in the Standard-Examiner on March 26, 2006: "Many months ago Ogden was approached by a developer who expressed interest in making a major investment in our community." So Godfrey wants us to think that it was Peterson who came to him with the idea.
Peterson's side of the story has never been put in writing, as far as I'm aware. The clearest version I remember hearing was at a presentation he gave to an invited crowd (mostly Chamber of Commerce types) on April 14, 2006. (I was invited by Producer Rupert himself!) There he stated that he originally bought the property with the idea of trading it to the Forest Service for developable land elsewhere. But first he decided to "pay a courtesy call" to the mayor, to tell him that such a trade would resolve the long-standing issues of access to trails on the property. According to Peterson, that was when Godfrey suggested that they could do "something more" with the property.
Given what we know about prior cooperation between Godfrey and Peterson on gondola schemes, my best guess is that neither one of them was being truthful about the origin of the idea.
Formerly Anonymous,
Welcome to Ogden. Maybe you work for Amer. Excellent company. They'll enjoy it here as will you wherever you are employed.
I'm fairly new, too. This gondola idea caught my eye shortly after moving here. Having lived at Mammoth and Tahoe I saw gondolas transform the area.
Unfortunately gondolas are not the most appropriate form of transit for our needs. They excel at many things but urban transit is not one of them unless you have the pocket cash to build a station for them every half mile or less.
Chris Peterson says it best:
“I believe more than ever that, for short, straight transit routes, a gondola is an exceptionally efficient way to move- passengers,” he said. “The ratio of passenger weight to total weight being moved can’t be matched by other modes of transit.”
He forgot to add how great they are for moving us up the mountain on a powder day.
Peterson is welcome to build a mountain gondola if he can wrangle a few acres for a base station but the size of Malan's Basin(180 ac.) could never justify it's cost. It would be chopped to bits in one gondola cycle on a powder day and largely uncattable leaving a mine field of icy moguls in the morning and absolute slop by early afternoon.
The downtown is 4.5 miles from any foothill base. That is a ridiculous distance to ride in a gondola.
You suggested it could be a shot in the arm. So could a nuclear plant, or selling our foothill open space for home development. So could a WalMart downtown. You likely moved here for something different. Stick to that thought for a while. Ogden is truly different. There is no hurry to get like California. Ogden is booming right now. It will continue because it is fantastic here. So many beautiful homes to refurb.
You'll see. Give yourself time. You'll feel like a local in no time and you won't want to change a thing.
FormAnon,
Having good folks like yourself moving here is all this city has ever needed since it's decline. If you see opportunity in the home values and the rundown blocks you are in the right frame of mind.
Just buying a home takes one more off the market. Tell your friends. There may never be an opportunity to live in such a recreational paradise and still own a home. That angle alone could have been used to lure many young people to take part in rebuilding a part of the city.
I think the Gondola was a pretty big issue floating around town for a couple of years before Godfrey first came into office. It also seems to this old memory that there were even pledges taken by politicians to not use public money for any Gondola project.
I also think that Rupert has been coaching Bobby and the rest of the Gondolistas on how to act bereaved over the mayor's new turn on the Gondola. Rupy is a big time show biz writer, director, producer after all. So coaching a bunch of prevaricaters in some basic acting techniques is no big deal to him, or them. Hey, they are all a bunch of actors, and they all know that Godfrey's new ploy, well is just that, a ploy. A script change if you will. It is only a game for the duration of the campaign and they will only have to pretend to be wounded and defeated during this part of the show. After December they will bring back the original script. It's all just a part of the Biz, eh Rupy? The big guy has to take care of business every once in a while, just like Elvis did. You can't stay king and neglect business totally.
After Little King Godfrey has the white ermine robe of victory draped across his bony little shoulders one more time, the Gondola monster will come back with a vengenance and a new sense of impunity. Watch your wallets, the young, the old and the vulnerable. The Little Lord Master cares not who he steps on in his quest for glory and he's going to be pissed and vindictive for people having pointed out his lack of satorial completeness, and the dramatic lengthening of his nose.
And after all, In Matt Godfrey world somebody has to pay the price for progress. So most pay that price, and a small few, AKA FOM's, get payed handsomely. And the King calls it good and blesses it.
Bottom line, there ainta no way in hell that Godfrey and Peterson have given up on this dream of a massive transfer of wealth from the public to themselves. They are both long time partners in this gondola marathon they have been running for at least 6 years. This campaign ploy is only a minor speed bump in their road to the pot of gold that they will find burried in Mount Ogden Park.
Like Arnold said in the Terminator: "I'll be back!" The Little Lord and his absurd court jesters will indeed be back - if they win in November...
Oz,
Before Godfrey it was generally called a tram, not a gondola. (Although the 1998 study did consider a gondola option.) And yes, the City Council passed one resolution before Godfrey and a stronger one after the Taylor Canyon fiasco, basically saying no city funds should be spent on the thing. Godfrey has weaseled out of that resolution by spending lots of city funds on the urban gondola but none (that we know of) on the mountain gondola that was the subject of the resolutions.
I'm afraid you're right about this thing coming back if he wins the election. But I don't think he'll change his mind about selling the golf course. The idea of moving half the golf course higher onto the mountain was never feasible anyway. In fact, keeping the golf course in place makes it much easier for Peterson to design his residential gated "community". He'll still need the slope angle restrictions lifted but that'll be easy if he gets one or two more votes on the Council. And if he wants control of the golf course, Godfrey could always lease it to him for 99 years and still be within the letter of his promise.
Why was the CC meeting cancelled tonight? Gondola and land grab stategy meeting instead?
We all know this is a sham scam. Don't for one second think that the lying emporer is serious. Like all psycopaths, he absolutely thinks he's invincible. The truth isn't in him.
Expediency and bare-fanged ''charm' are his watch words.
Mark my word, and like Ozboy admonished: hold onto your wallets.
Hold onto your skepticism.
There's trouble in Ogden City!
The Gondola sell the golf course and our souls are only postponed for six months. Just like the great prognosticator Ozboy said. No matter who wins the primary to face the two faced little liar, we the people need to elect his opponent.
I have a dream...
There is (at least) a three-way race for Mayor in the primary election, and Matthew Godfrey comes in third.
Montreme:
I agree with you. I think Neil Hansen will be the ultimate winner. Better yet, the true winners will be the people of Ogden. Hansen from what I’ve seen of him has the vision, experience, dedication to revitalize Ogden, the most cost effective way!
Dan,
the Trib ran a story on Peterson probably a year ago, at least, where he is quoted about wanting to swap the Malan's Basin land with the Forest Service and also that Godfrey was the one who convinced him otherwise.
As for the gondola/tram issue returning ... when I moved here in 93 I was told by someone who had been at WSU since 63 that the idea to build a ski lift/tram/gondola up the west side of Mt Ogden seems to re-appear every ten years or so. So I'm sure it will be back.
Variations of the idea have been around at least a hundred years, so it won�t be going away any time soon. I think somebody posted this link here a few months ago, but I find it fascinating, so here it is again: Grand Malan's Resort Plan c. 1907
Another great article in today�s Standard Examiner. Hopefully the Mayor and City can now get down to real business.
Post a Comment