We've just received another press release from the Ogden Sierra Club's Dan Schroeder, containing what we consider to be bunkerbuster information concerning Boss Godfrey's "Secret Gondola Study Saga."
In the interest of inserting this information into the public domain as quickly and efficiently as possible, we incorporate the entire document in full, without analysis or editorial comment:
Dear members of the press:We intend to take Sierra Club Chairman Schroeder up immediately on his gracious offer to provide copies of these documents. If all goes well, we'll be able to expeditiously obtain and upload the most relevant material to our storage site very soon, for our gentle readers' benefit.
In response to a GRAMA request submitted a month ago, I have just received from Ogden City a large stack of documents. Several of these documents contain information that seems newsworthy to me, although they leave many questions unanswered.
The documents center around the "Ogden Gondola Fiscal Impacts Analysis" study performed last year by Lewis Young Robertson & Burningham (LYRB), which was the subject of several news articles last month. Most of the documents are email messages exchanged among various city staff members and UTA staff regarding the arrangements and procedures for paying for the LYRB study. Among other things, the documents reveal the following:
• Whereas UTA was apparently willing to reimburse Ogden City for the cost of the LYRB study, high-level city officials repeatedly insisted that UTA instead pay LYRB directly. For example, a March 23, 2007 email from Ogden CAO John Patterson to Mick Crandall of UTA states that "it is IMPOSSIBLE for us to do so," referring to paying the bill from LYRB.
• In response, Crandall states in an April 2, 2007 email that for UTA to pay contractors directly "would be a violation of our procurement rules and accounting standards and UTA cannot make an exception." Crandall goes on to state that UTA "is very reluctant to interject itself into internal matters of a City" and is therefore requiring a written agreement in part to "ensure that the Mayor and the City Council both would concur at least in the use of these funds..."
• An April 2, 2007 email from Finance Manager John Arrington to Patterson similarly indicates that the administration's concern was to keep the City Council from learning about the payment: "we paid an expense in the past without out [sic] Council knowing and we are still suffering from that decision."
• A May 16, 2007 email from Arrington to Patterson again indicates that the administration was concerned about the City Council: "I hope we can get this done without dual payees (City and UTA) since the Council will be looking for anything running to or through the City. [City Attorney] Gary Williams doesn't like the duel [sic] check either, because it still implicates Ogden City."
• Val Brown of UTA expressed an additional concern in a pair of emails to Arrington on May 10 and May 14, 2007: "Frankly, from past experience we've been a bit disappointed in Ogden City's compliance with requirements ... we have audit reports indicating that in the past there have been some problems."
• Mayor Godfrey was involved in several of these email exchanges. For example, on May 15, 2007 he emailed Patterson asking him to "please work with John [Arrington] on this." On December 22, 2006, Patterson forwarded two of Arrington's emails to Godfrey, adding the comments "Does he have early onset Alzheimer's?" and "AMAZING!!"
• Although the bill from LYRB was for only $16,250, the city administration's intent was for UTA to use the rest of the money freed up by the $247,500 federal earmark to reimburse Chris Peterson for his expenses related to the gondola project. In his May 16, 2007 email to Patterson, Arrington states: "I think [Crandall] would be the one to have Chris work through also in getting his vendors qualified as direct pay providers. I'll be sending him an e-mail with UTA's procurement guidelines and ask that he work through UTA involving us for information purposes to get $231,250 of his expenses covered."
• On June 12, 2007, Mayor Godfrey signed an official memorandum to "waive the competitive selection process" for procurement of the services of LYRB for their study (which was initiated around March, 2006). Such a waiver is apparently required by the Ogden City Code. UTA had previously expressed its concern that the city follow its own procurement procedures in this matter.
• An email from lobbyist Ken Lee to Patterson, dated June 1, 2007, acknowledges his receipt of a copy of the LYRB study. Lee then asks, "Has it been leaked? Is the opposition up in arms yet?" In a second email to Patterson on the same date, also copied to Godfrey, Lee says, "I want to get it in the hands of everyone on the Hill. OK with that?" These emails seem to imply that Lee is engaged in a further lobbying effort on behalf of the Peterson project.
• On another subject (probably unrelated), Mayor Godfrey received an email on May 14, 2007 from Mori and Gadi Leshem, proposing that the Leshems lease a portion of UTA's property near 17th and Wall for use in a development they were planning. Godfrey then forwarded this email to Art Bowen of UTA. I contacted Bowen by phone and he indicated that UTA was not interested in leasing its property. However, the Leshems already own a large amount of property in this area and this email indicates that Godfrey is working with the Leshems on a development proposal of some kind. The City Council recently approved a rezone of the Leshems' property. As far as I'm aware, the public has not been told what sort of development is being contemplated.
Besides the documents provided in response to my GRAMA request, the City Attorney's office has withheld other "draft agreements and correspondence" that are protected because they are drafts or "by attorney-client privilege." Among the protected records is the draft agreement between UTA and the city. I spoke with Crandall by phone and he told me that he expects the agreement to be finalized very soon, and he'll send me a copy as soon as it is.
I would be happy to provide you with copies of any or all of the documents I've received. Alternatively, I'm sure you could easily obtain copies directly from the City Recorder's office. The full collection is probably about 300 pages, although much of it is redundant because of the way email replies usually incorporate the message being replied to.
I hope you can find a way to bring some of these details to the attention of the public. Please let me know if I can help in any way.
Dan Schroeder, Conservation Chair
Ogden Sierra Club
In the meantime, we present this "raw" information immediately -- for the enlightenment of those few remaining gentle readers who still entertain lingering confidence in the trustworthiness of Boss Godfrey -- the man who always "lies whenever his lips are moving" -- yet nevertheless claims to have "higher integrity than anybody in the room."
Update 7/28/07 1:15 p.m. MT: At our request, Chairman Schroeder this morning kindly furnished us a CD, containing electronic versions of the GRAMA-produced documents provided pursuant to the Sierra Club's GRAMA request. In that connection we have uploaded and linked some of these documents, to corroborate the allegations set forth in the forgoing press release.
Update 7/31/07 12:03 p.m. MT: We have now uploaded and linked the data contained in the above-referenced CD. Twenty-nine pages in all, these pages represent the most interesting and relevant material furnished by the Ogden City Mayor's Office, pursuant to the Sierra Club's July GRAMA document production request. You may view the full document collection here.
58 comments:
Squirrel Patrol alert! My, my. Who is the f?????? moron in charge at UTA? Why is he willing to pay Wayne Peterson and his famed Squirrel Patrol for "expenses" related to Lying Little Matty Gondola Godfrey's silly-ass circus ride to nowhere? Indeed, the Squirrel Patrol lives and we should all be wary. If anyone doubted the veracity of the argument that Lying Little Matty Gondola Godfrey's "decision" to take the parkland sale "off the table" was an electioneering stunt, he or she should stuff a Geigerian onion roll down his or her throat. Speaking of onions, and in the context of these latest revelations, THE SKI IS (NOT) BEAUTIFUL BLUE.
Oops! Looks like the wheels are coming off the G-train.
If the little twerp had a gram of the "integrity" he boasts about, he'd resign right now, before Scott Schwebke's next expose hits the newspaper racks and porches tomorrow morning.
So where is the crime? Where is the smoking gun? Could all of this not be interpreded as "normal" in view of the many and complex piles of paper work any given city generates in doing city business?
Can some lawyerly reader of this blog give us a simple step by step primer on how any of this would imply illegality on the part of the mayor or city employees?
It may point to a sleazy and slippery MO in the mayor's office, but is it really anything other than a complicated PR problem?
Whoa, Jason. As far as I can tell, nobody at UTA ever agreed to reimburse Peterson directly, or even hinted that they would do so. And Mick Crandall assured me on the phone yesterday that that will not happen. It does sound like UTA will pay LYRB for the study they did, but my impression is that no more of the $247,500 will be spent until the mayor and the council can agree on how to spend it.
ozboy: In passing this information on to the press, I certainly don't mean to imply that I think anything illegal happened. But I really don't know, because I'm not familiar with the rules and procedures for spending government money. It does appear that some rules were stretched.
Oz:
Well, the news [as seems clear from the emails Dan unearthed] that Hizzonah was contriving to have the taxpayers pay off about a quarter of a million dollars of Mr. Peterson's costs in developing his plans for Mt. Ogden Park and allied projects [which plans the Mayor has since announced were never feasible in the first place] is worth pursuing, though I'm not sure if any legal lines were crossed.
But Dan's posting [one thread down] does have this:
For the gondola study the consultants were hired in secret with no open bidding, but the mayor did sign a memo to formally waive open bidding. Only trouble is, the study began in March 2006, and the waiver wasn't signed until June 2007.
Unless Ogden city ordinances provide for retroactive waiving of the open bid provisions for city contracting [which somehow, I suspect they do not], that one might be a problem.
In light of the way the Mayor's office has behaved in re: the LYRB financial analysis the Mayor ordered but didn't want the city to pay for... poor LYRB's bill seems to have bounced back and forth between UTA and the Mayor's office with each one claiming the other should pay it... and in light of UTA's having had problems with the City's handling of grants in the past [see Dan's post], and in light of the city's apparently violating its own financial procedures and asking the UTA to violate its financial procedures to help conceal the Mayor's machinations... it is not at all surprising to me that only one consultant bid on the contract for doing the water and sewer analysis. I suspect the only reason even LYRB was willing to bid was the the contract was authorized by the Council, which has the money in hand to pay for it, and which makes no bones about who is ordering the work done... the Council is... and who is responsible for paying the bill... the city is.
I suspect the management folks at UTA by now have had their fill of dealing with Godfrey, whose machinations on this [apparently mostly aimed at preventing the Council... and the public... from finding out what his administration was doing] have embarrassed the UTA and, God knows, Ogden City. Perhaps it's time for someone at UTA to ask a sampler-making grandma to do a nice one containing some down-home folk wisdom for the wall of UTA head, Mr. John Inglish's office:
"When you lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas."
Curm:
The city's ordinance (which is conveniently attached to the mayor's waiver) doesn't seem to say anything about when the waiver can be signed. The waiver itself uses the future tense, as if the services haven't yet been performed, which seems pretty odd but it's not really dishonest because the date (June 12, 2007) is right there at the top, and an invoice dated March 3, 2007 is attached.
I didn't receive a copy of any contract between the city and LYRB, and I'm not sure why--perhaps it's still considered a draft. One or two of the emails do refer to altering the contract to say UTA instead of Ogden City. It'll be interesting to see what all the final documents actually say, when they're released. They'll undoubtedly try to make everything look as tidy as possible, but they won't be able to completely hide the mess.
Oh, one more thing....
In light of what the documents Dan uncovered reveal, I presume there will be no more claims now that Rep. Hansen's asking for an audit of how the Godfrey administration handled its state grant money was merely "politically motivated."
I don't think the reasonableness and soundness of Hansen's asking the State Auditor to look into the Godfrey administration's handling of grants money can be doubted any more.
And now I can't help wondering, what else is the Godfrey administration desperately trying to keep the public from finding out as the election approaches?
Curm-
I mostly agree w/ your last posting & assessment. When I mentioned Hansen's potential political motivation earlier this week all I was doing was questioning his timing. I personally think it should have been looked into months ago. And I still don't know if Neil would be asking these questions if he weren't running for mayor.
Election or no election, I've always wondered what the Godfrey administration is keeping from the public. Way too much.
Great work Dan. Every Ogden citizen, if they aren't outraged by now w/ how this administration has been running, should be at least a little bit upset after reading some of these comments. Yikes.
I certainly hope that the SE picks up on this and furthermore that they pose some important questions to Godfrey. For instance: why did the mayor want neither the council nor the Ogden public to know that his office was behind the LYRB study? Why did he want it to appear as though this was all UTA's doing? Why does the mayor not want the council and the Ogden public to know how he is using the city's funds? Why does he consider it to be appropriate for the federal government to reimburse Chris Peterson for expenses incurred on a project that he claimed would make him close to $500 mill?
TK:
You wrote: Why does he consider it to be appropriate for the federal government to reimburse Chris Peterson for expenses incurred on a project that he claimed would make him close to $500 mill?
Excellent question. But I'm curious too about which member of Congress put the $250K earmark for the gondola study into the federal budget. These things don't happen by themselves. Whose fingerprints are on this one? Cong. Rob Bishop? Sen Bennet? Sen. Hatch?
Maybe it would be a good time for all the Ogden Republicans I meet who voted for Bishop and Hatch last time round because they were, they keep telling me, "fiscal conservatives," to call up Bishop's office, and Hatch's and ask what they think of Ogden's Republican Mayor's attempt to spend a quarter of a million dollars in taxpayers' money to pay off the bad decision debts of the Mayor's crony Chris Peterson... debts incurred prepping for a project the Mayor now concedes was not viable from the start. Where does Bishop stand on this? Hatch? How about the Weber County Republican Party's leaders? Or is all to be silence because the Mayor trying to shunt tax money to reimburse his crony for bad business judgment is a Republican?
I know, I know, it's only a quarter of a million dollars. But you know, quarter of a million here, quarter of a million there, and pretty soon you're talking about real money. Or is a quarter of a million in public funds too trivial an amount for fiscal conservatives to bother themselves about these days?
Be interesting to see what Ogden and Weber County Republican leaders have to say about the Mayor's attempt to have the taxpayers cover Peterson's expenses resulting from his bad business judgment.
Most business folk, when they sink money into non-viable schemes, have to eat the losses on their own. But then, they didn't have the foresight to become a Godfrey Administration crony -- which seems to have been the only prudent [for him] decision Peterson made.
Nice work Mr. Dan S.
Can you please tell us again why you haven't received the other documents? You said it is because they are in "draft" form? I don't understand what this means. Why can't everything be classified as draft?
Do they have have a deadline on which they must produce these documents? And can they push this deadline beyond the election?
My last question is, I think, the most important question.
And one other thing...
If a correspondance between an attorney and a client is protected, then does this not imply that there is an ongoing investigation of the client?
Who is the Client? Matthew Godfrey? Ogden City Corporation?
Who is the investigator? The Weber County Attorney? The State of Utah? The US Government?
See I told you so. this little twerp can't be trusted and should not be in the public trust any longer.
Dan:
A query: you posted this --- * A May 16, 2007 email from Arrington to Patterson again indicates that the administration was concerned about the City Council: "I hope we can get this done without dual payees (City and UTA) since the Council will be looking for anything running to or through the City. [City Attorney] Gary Williams doesn't like the duel [sic] check either, because it still implicates Ogden City."
Is the implication there that City Attorney Gary Williams was advising the Administration on how to keep knowledge of the payment from the City Council?
native,
Good questions. I don't have time to answer in full right now, but meanwhile you can read the GRAMA statute yourself. Section 304 lists the various types of "protected" records, including drafts and attorney-client communications. The best explanations I've seen are in the GRAMA Handbook on the Attorney General's web site.
Curm:
Let's just say that I can't think of any other interpretation.
Oz,
What comes through for me a is a pattern of deceit on the part of the mayor's office to the city council, and the public - cold, calculating, deceit - with the UTA, of all people, plaintively trying to get the Godfrey administration to follow the city's rules.
Like I've said, any reporter out there looking for the mother lode will never find better diggings than right here, right now.
It is remarkable with the millions spent on "news gathering" around here, that the info has to come from places like Dan Schroeder and "Ogden Red," on an Internet blog.
Thank goodness for them. But where is the press??
Jill-
You need to be alerted to the fact that some of us, including myself, have been looking into Mayor Godrey's financial dealings for 3 years so this is not new or just publicized or discovered because someone is running for Mayor against Godfrey.
Our problem has been that we were stonewalled with GRAMA requests not being completed properly.
We owe the Standard-Examiner thanks for coming to the aid of those trying to get GRAMAs furnished.
And Chairman Schroeder and the Sierra Club get my most heartfelt thanks for this post!!!!!
Now the time has come for some competent news reporter to do an expose of the funny money involved with the American Can/Da Vinci Academy/Riverside Technology High School/Riverside Technology Non-Profit Foundation/ Ogden Community Foundation convoluted tax scheme.
There are several articles that demand to be written.
The Ogden press lies in the lazy, clueless and un-curious Schwepke. Basically a press release reporter.
It is rather sad that in the never dull, (or honest) days of Matt Godfrey the Ogden paper would have such a lame reporter on the case. This could be the ultimate opportunity for the Standard to break out of its lethargy and really become a great paper again.
I think they do not want a good and competent reporter on Godfrey's case. They owe him too much because of the sweet heart deal he cut them on their multi million dollar offices.
The significance of e-mails between Ogden City employees John Patterson and John Arrington and Mayor Godfrey proves there was collusion to commit fraud.
Collusion takes the deceit from civil law fraud to criminal felony status.
Patterson and Arrington should be fired immediately. Gary Williams should be disbarrred.
Mayor Godfrey should do the honorable thing and resign before he is indicted.
Scott Brown used to be Ogden City's expert on money laundering.
Any one know who the financial genius is who is now in charge?
Jenny
Just what do you see as the "fraud" here? So far I can't see it. It appears to be just the garden variety slippin and slidin that is common in lots of levels of government here in the land of the Elephants. The League of Cities and Towns has regular courses to teach these people how to avoid leveling with the public!
As far as mayor Godfrey doing the "honorable thing" - surely you jest!
Miss Mae
Scott Brown and Stu Reid are still in the middle of everything. They are the architects of this incredible and corrupt financial maze the mayor has created, and they are only a phone call away.
In Stu's case he is also still on the city payroll. This in itself should be a conflict of interest if he is the mayor's money raiser and going around strong arming Ogden Biz people for donations, as reporter a few days ago.
As far as the potential conflict goes, I guess we may never know being that none of this circle of ethically challenged empty suits has ever complied with the State Law on conflict of interest disclosure.
Frank:
Mr. Schwebke is a beat reporter. He covers Ogden city government, and as such, covers a great deal, not just Godfrey scandals. He's been doing yoeman service lately, I think, and has done some good stuff. [Remember, the oft-praised-here SL Trib didn't find what Dan S. turned up either.]
What you're wanting, I think, is what you'd expect, and I would too, from an investigative reporter who's put on one story to dig into deeply more or less full time or close to it.
I'd agree, however, that the scope and smell content of the Godfrey Administration scandals have risen to such a level of ripeness, that perhaps the SE might want now to consider tasking some reporter with the job of digging into all this full time for a bit.
I'd like to take a minute here to praise Scott Schwebke. He is the one who pursued this story with great vigor during May and June. If he hadn't turned up what he did, it never would have occurred to me to submit this GRAMA request. In fact, before submitting it I even called him to make sure he didn't already have more documents than were mentioned in the paper. I then told him what sort of a request I had in mind ("all correspondence between Ogden City and UTA...") and got the impression that he wouldn't be submitting such a request himself, for whatever reason. Probably he was just too busy with other stories. My role here has merely been to take one more step down a trail that he discovered.
The Can building, the lobbyist payed with Ogden City tax dollars to solicit federal tax dollars for a private scam artist lunatic, a sneaky busines deal at the rail stop, the attempted highjacking of public property, the ecconomic developement dept. acting in their own personal behalf, the planning commission shirking their professional calling to act in consort with the land grab scheme to the detriment of the people of Ogden City, following the wishes of said scam artist lunatic's council,kind of makes the porn and sexual harrasment seem minor in comparison. I wonder if Rasmussen's have ever been paid for the Malans property, or is that tangled in the web also. Can't help but think that bootjack deal wasn't for a land swap at the top of 36th st.
Anybody but lying little matty, definately gondola still, pinnoccio, chucky cheeze impersonating scumbag, immoral jackass, self righteous, peccary godfrey.
Vote early, vote often.
Did I mention that, a peccary is a small pig, with a white Collar ?
I've said it many time before, and I'll say it yet again:
"Madness in great ones must not unwatch'd go."
I'd advise you people to keep a close eye on this Godfrey character until the screen door smacks him in the backside in January.
Also be certain to keep a close eye on the silverware.
He' a full-tilt bull-goose loonybird thief, who won't cease picking your pockets 'til he's hauled out of towne on a rail.
I just have to chuckle, lying little matty, just may find his high adventure recreation afterall. Running from his fellow inmates at the point of the mountain.
I agree that Scott Schwepke has been doing a pretty good job of reporting lately. As pointed out he covers all of Ogden government, not just the mayorial malfeasance department.
It would be great if the Suits of Sandusky did assign him exclusively to investigating sneaky doings within the Godfrey administration. He and the Standard could very well win those Pulitzer prizes if they did.
For the sheer volume of work that Schwepke puts out, he does very well.
So here's to Scott. I hope he is allowed to stay on this story.
Only a Republican would say "I have higher integrity than anybody in the room."
By the way " I'm going to give you a ticket if your lawn isn't green; and I'm going to increase your "water fees" code word for (tax-hike). Because Republicans are against taxes.
Oh ya just another thing a Republican Mayor would do. Give you a ticket if you have one of his opponents sign in your yard! How many of you have had that problem?
Hey, here's a question for anybody but lying little matty, potato nose, short deck bobby, Stuart (I quit,where's my severance check)Reid, the overfed tom moore, the (I used to be a trucker till matty and ben got me into city sanctioned realestate) g-train (gag me with a spoon) wilkerson, dustin (I'm as good a mormon as matty) chapman,bill (matty gave me my first ever real job)glassman, john(dirty work) patterson or brandon(it's gonna be real lonely) stephenson.
What has chris (wayne) squirrel phobic peterson spent one dime on, let alone $231,000? Could be lying little matty want to reimburse him for buying the Malan's property.
Dan:
When are you going to give the Sierra Club Endorsement to State Rep Neil Hansen for Mayor. Especially after all the time and work he did to protect, not only Ogden but other areas of the State.
Us Cops and Fire Fighters are right out, side by side, with Neil Hansen. To protect Cops and Firefighter, so they'll have the tools of the trade they need. To protect us all.
Go Neil Hansen, were with ya!
Now the filing deadline has past, the campains should be reving up.
Just what will eccles, peterson, irons, howland and johnson be running on? More corroption, an eagerness for a happy totally uninformed council that will rubberstamp any cronyistic scheme that's proposed? I wonder if there's a plan in the making to use Ogden City tax dollars to pay Gadi's future judgements in Ca.? Makes as much sense as reimbursing Peterson.
Just A Cop:
Dan S. cannot "give the Sierra Club endorsement" to anyone. The Ogden Group generally sends an issues survey to candidates, inviting their opinion on matters important to the club [conservation issues, trails, environmental issues, etc]. Sometimes, members of the Ogden Group's Ex Com will meet with candidates [or try to] to get a better idea of their views on the issues. Sometimes, following all that, the group's Ex Com will recommend candidates to members in some of the races, which recommendations I think have to be approved by the state Sierra Club Ex Com first. The group might also simply circulate to its members, without comment and verbatim, the candidate replies to questionares.
But the notion that Dan S., or anyone else for that matter, can simply "give" the Ogden group's endorsement to any candidate is false.
[Full disclosure: I am a member of the Ogden Group of the Sierra Club.]
Can any one on this web site tell me why the other major mayor candidate (and minor one for that matter) have been so quite on this blooming American Can scandal?
It seems that Mz. Van Hooser especially should weigh in on this vital issue considering that she sits on the city council that apparently has been duped on a lot of this.
So, where do you stand on all of this Mz. Van Hooser? Does the cat have your tongue? Are you afraid to speak out on anything controversial? Are you going to run on the wimp platform? Are you going to let Hansen do all the heavy lifting and then try to sneak in on the coattails of his courage?
Are you the leader of the Do Nothing Party here in Ogden?
I don't know much about Hansen yet, but I do admire his courage in speaking up for the people on this issue. And no, I do not see it as "political" that he is doing so. He is an elected official representing the citizens of Ogden.
Oh, it just occured to me - maybe that's Van Hooser's excuse, nobody elected her to anything so far!
How does she think she can be mayor if she doesn't have the guts or decency to speak out on a matter of this importance?
Geno:
It's certainly fair to ask Ms. Hooser where she stands on calling for an Audit by the State Auditor. But I doubt you'll get a serious answer if you phrase the question as an attack, as you've done above. Candidates generally ignore belligerent questions that are clearly not questions, but attacks or thinly disguised endorsements of their opponents.
But it's a fair question, and if put fairly, you'll probably get an answer I'd think.
Curmudgeon
Sometimes you remind me of the guy that took a knife to a gun fight!
Jeeze, no wonder some of you Democrats can't get elected to much of anything around these parts!
I don't think Gena"s comment was necessarily out of line considering the rough and tumble nature of Ogden politics. Just look at all the mean spirited crap Godfrey operates on, and he has been elected twice. I also would like to point out the aggresive nature of Glasmann's successful campaign where he pulled very few punches.
I don't think most Ogden voters appreciate panty wasted and vapid politicians. Might be wrong here, but my money is on kick butt, tell it like it is candidates that won't mince words when it comes to defining why we should elect them.
This is the west my man, time for you to put those pussy Looseeaner ways behind you and saddle up for a good old fashioned cowboy shoot out! Hell, ya just might end up on the winning side for a change!!
And by the way, I too would like to know why Mrs. Van Hooser has been so silent on this important issue. Are we to assume she is not going to weigh in on anything important to the voters?
I do not recall the exact numbers, but this amount that the mayor was trying to divert to Mr. Peterson is very close to the sum he sold the Wall street property to Peterson for, which was considerably less than what some else, not a friend, had offered for the property.
Why is the mayor so intent on giving city money and property to Mr. Peterson?
$231,250, to be exact, Lou.
Bootjack purchase price" $270,000 & change.
Close enough for a supposed bigshot like Peterson.
I find it difficult to believe that anyone with an ounce of ethics or moral values could ever vote for Matthew Godfrey again, considering the documents that are linked here.
Yet we know there are people who consider themselves moral one day of the week, and then get back to their worldly existance, and write it off as something "mysterious" they really know nothing about, politics, that is.
"It's not our business," they say.
And besides that, "He goes to my church."
Oz:
To the best of my knowledge, Geno is not a candidate. Geno purported to be somebody who wanted to know where Ms. Hooser stands on the question of the Audit of the city grant funds. Fair question. Taking him at his word, I suggested if he truly wants an answer, then asking the question as he did here is not likely to get him one.
Yes, aggressive campaigning is often successful... but when it gets too aggressive, it can backfire. Witness Godfrey's proxy Patterson's despicable attack on Garcia through Garcia's troubled son. I don't think that in the end helped the Godfrey campaign. It seems to have done the reverse. You may think that sort of thing is a good model for the Hansen campaign, apparently on grounds that if Godfrey does it, every candidate needs to do it. I don't.
The idea is not to be aggressive just to be aggressive. The idea is to be effective. Didn't seem to me Geno's questions, as posted, were that. Seemed just more partisan bellowing likely to appeal only to the already committed. Like endless posts about "The Squirrel Patrol" or "Potato Nose" or "Lying Little Matty" or "criminals" [who have not yet been charged or indicted much less convicted of anything] or "lunatics" [based on I have no idea what]. All that does is make the posters feel good. I guess.
I know Rudi hopes to attract new readers to WCF during the election. If I were a newbie to WCF looking for more election information than I could find in the papers and the first three or four posts I read talked about The Squirrel Patrol [and I'd have no idea what that was] and Potato Nose [and I'd have no idea who that was] and indulged in rants charging "Lying Little Matty" with being a criminal soon to be sodomized at Point of the Mountain, I'd leave WCM pretty quick. And I wouldn't be back.
You may think all that is effective campaigning, Oz. I don't.
Where Hooser stands on the audit is a fair question. Effective campaigning in this instance seems to me to ask her that question in a way likely to get it answered or ducked [from both of which undecided voters can draw conclusions]. Asking it in a way that she can safely ignore achieves little.
As for this: "This is the west my man, time for you to put those pussy Looseeaner ways behind you and saddle up for a good old fashioned cowboy shoot out! Hell, ya just might end up on the winning side for a change!!"
Well, Oz, if you think politics in South Louisiana [and I spent thirty years at it off and on there] is goody-two-shoes milquetoast politics, I advise you never to get involved in a political campaign there. And I've been on the winning side more often than not.
Concentrate, Oz. The idea is not to out-swagger the other guy and establish that yours are bigger than his. The idea is to win over as many of the undecided and uncommitted voters as possible so that come election night you've go got champagne dripping off your hair and are being hugged by good looking campaign staff at the celebration and the other guys are worrying about what happened and whether the state liquor store will take back the champaign. And to make that happen, Oz, Hansen's people need to concentrate on being effective. They need to keep their eyes on the prize, Oz. Eyes on the prize.
Curmudgeon,
I agree, and I've said so before, that name calling and "bellowing" is a poor way to attract interested readers. It's childish and cheapens the discussion. Factual information, such as humorous reminders of the mayor's self-promoted integrity and his apparent arrogance regarding city business, can be an effective method of exposing the mayors methods.
As a learned man, what do you think are the most effective methods of "winning over" undecided and uncommitted voters? Unfortunately, personal attacks seem to work for some politicians of a certain political persuasion. Karl Rove is a master of character assasination.
Oops, I almost forgot. Nice work Dan S! Great post Rudi.
Curm, I must respectfully inform you, this blog is not now, nor will it ever be a social nicity exchange. The function of a blog is to allow anyone, ANYONE, to call it like they see it.
A whole lot of good information has seen it's first light here; we can inform but it requires political and journalistic will to follow up.
Let's look at the $900,000 state grant to the can building, HIGH TECH CENTER. Exercizing our right,we filed grama requests and received a copy of the grant. It was obvious that the mayor had not complied with the provisions (terms) of the grant. It was spelled out in plain english that failure to comply would require return of the money. Cut and dried. Along comes one of Shurtliff's lackies with a statement saying lying little matty tried to comply, a statement, no investigation, no report signed by an investigator, just a little statement for political cover for lying little matty.
Shurtliff and the gov, both know that state grant is just the tip of the iceberg with the CAN building.
As to refering to this mayor as "lying little matty" I challenge you to come up with one example where lying little matty has told the truth, the absolute truth, in his 7+ years at the helm.
It ain't name calling, it's calling a spade a spade.
"Potato nose" is the least obscene descriptive label I can use.(see posting guidelines) He's earned this name in a most dishonorable fashion, sticking his face out for every scam lying little matty launches on the people of Ogden for the last 2 years. Pathetic jackass, modern day aqualung. 24/7 on Ogden's own tv station. He has an unfortunate natural propensity for lying.
Lunatic and squirrel patrol, too related to be separated. One is a manifestation the other. This Ogden Valley legend can be found in numerous postings in Rudi's archives. It's a must read, for anyone curious about lying little matty's most preferred benefactor.
Now regarding lying little matty's future trip to the big house,(we could be so lucky) we're trying, many more GRAMAs in the pipe, no stone unturned; I'll have you know, I never mentioned ******, I know lying little matty used to be a runner, but it is close quarters.(some people's imaginations run wild)
Lastly dear Curmudgeon, the blog is current, it's the readers' responsibility to keep up. Now lighten up, make your point and just allow yourself to have some fun once in a while, but keep it brief, (just kidding.)
P.S. Anyone harboring any false sense of objectivity with regards to lying little matty and his administrative gouls: check the tone in the E-mails provided here. Just who does this administration perceive their enemy to be?
The Council, the public? SWEET.
Curmudgeon
WoW
You finally got your dander up! Congratulations, maybe you will be a rider in this rodeo after all!
There are certainly a number of things I agree with in your last post. Some I don't - obviously.
So where to begin? Well, I am with you on the name calling business, although I must admit I have partaken of the forbidden fruit on this blog a time or two myself. Especially when it comes to laying out the little lord, his mountain of lies and his circle of empty suits. Something about disingenuous punks that brings it out of me on occasion. I also have to admit it is fun sometimes. When I grow up like you perhaps I will change, no guarantees however.
So I agree with you in not finding much humor or political value in the repeated uses of "potato nose, lying little Matty, squirrel patrol, etc etc. They may have been a little humorous with the first use or two (maybe not), but with the repeating of them ad nauseam, any potential novelty has worn off long ago. And by the way, I never said I thought that was "effective campaigning", did I? Also, I think Geno's post was rather mild compared to lots of others here, including plenty of mine!
I think you might be sorely mistaken if you think Patterson's attack on Garcia and his son "backfired". I have seen no indication of it backfiring, and knowing Ogden and its people like I do, I am afraid that particular cheap shot may just get a little traction in certain quarters.
And, I absolutely did not say I thought this was a good model for the Hansen campaign. In fact I didn't say anything about the Hansen campaign one way or the other, did I? Didn't say that I thought Godfrey and his tactics were a good role model either. Only said aggresive campaigning does work around here, witness Godfrey and Glasmann.
By the way, do really think if we sugar coat it and say pretty please that Mz. Van Hooser would be more likely to step up to the plate on this important issue quicker than if she is challenged with a little vigor? I think if she continues to duck this, and other important touchy subjects, that the voters of Ogden will not show her much respect.
And yes, I do recognize that Louisiana politics can be pretty rought and tumble. But I will put up our home grown, down, dirty and mean spirited Republican politicians against those bush league bad boys in Cajun country any day of the week and give you ten points to boot! Don't come no nastier and dishonest than Utah Republicans. Borin Orrin against the King Fish descendants? No contest in the mean department if you ask me.
Now concentrate Curm, I never said that the way to go was to "out-swagger the other guy and establish that yours are bigger than his" and I don't know what your comment "Hansen's people need to concentrate on being effective" has to do with anything I posted. Don't recall having referred to the Hansen campaign at all in that post as a matter of fact.
Other than that, it seems to me that we agree on alot more than we disagree on.
Mount em up cowboy, lets go throw them doggies - Ogden style.
Oz:
You wrote: And yes, I do recognize that Louisiana politics can be pretty rought and tumble. But I will put up our home grown, down, dirty and mean spirited Republican politicians against those bush league bad boys in Cajun country any day of the week and give you ten points to boot!
In Louisiana, the real down and dirty politics was Dem vs Dem [in the primaries]. The actual elections [Dem vs Rep] were tea dances by comparison.
The Sunday SE has a longish article up on Blogging.... They approached the matter with, I suspect, something less than the highest standard of journalistic impartiality. The headline is "A Web of Deception".
The piece is largely --- not entirely but largely --- a belabored statement of the obvious. Like there is a lot of misinformation out there on blogs. [True.] You have to be careful not to believe everything you see on them. [True.] It's wise to ask for sources when people claim things in blog discussions. [True.] Some real journalism, real news occasionally gets broken on blogs. [True.] The sun rises in the east and sets in the west. [True.]
OK, OK, I made that last one up. But it has about the same news value as much of what's in the article.
But for what it's worth, the story can be found here. [Hope that link works. The SE is being persnickety this morning about forwarding a link via email and I'm trying a workaround. Apologies if it doesn't.]
Defining blogs has become the current rage among mainstream media. Virtually every traditional news outlet has lined up like sheep to regurgitate the typically predictable blogosphere analysis. Even the term "blog" has a dirtier unprofessional undertone that is easily exploitable by straight newscasters in fine suits and coifed rugs. Ultimately it is only the costumes and production that give the corporate sources more legitimacy in the eyes of the drone populace. After all, they willingly pour swill and offal down their gullets after a good prodding by the same corporate wiseguys convince them of it's value via slick commercial vignettes making such behavior seem normal and sexy.
Just what is wrong with people reporting the news or at the very least commenting on it. I could find more manipulation and downright deception in the elementary reportorial fashion regularly displayed on their outdated birdcage liners.
Just a Cop said...
"Us Cops and Fire Fighters are right out, side by side, with Neil Hansen."
Please don’t say that the Firefighters on board with any candidate as yet.
The Fire Fighters do have a process that they follow closely. They have each candidate fill out a questionnaire to explain the candidate’s views and understanding of the fire service and issues pertaining to the Ogden Fire Department.
They then review the questionnaires, and invite the candidates to a one on one interview to further discuss issues and concerns.
Then they may or may not choose a candidate to endorse.
I have not even seen an endorsement by the Fire Fighters at this time.
I know that this process is valid, because I am a former candidate who has gone through it.
The Firefighters endorsement is a very prestigious on, and coveted by all most candidates, because of the process that they use to choose or not choose a candidate.
I don’t really recall the police officers really stepping up to the plate when the political season rolls around.
I have never received any flyers or brochures from the Police, endorsing any candidates.
I have never been interviewed by the Police Association for the past political office that I ran for, maybe you could explain what their process was to endorse Neil Hansen, or decide to back him?
Today's anti-blog article is part of an entrenched pattern of anti-blog bias at the Standard-Examiner.
It's understandable enough: They know that blogs can sometimes make them look bad by beating them to important stories or by filling in details that they don't bother to print. Blogs also provide a forum for direct public criticism of the newspaper and its staff, whether justified or not--and the S-E editors seem to have thin skins about this. They also must view blogs as competition for their readers, though I would argue that blogs also send readers to the newspaper (at least its online version) an awful lot.
For the most part, the S-E has dealt with blogs by publicly pretending they don't exist. For example, I went to the S-E digital archives, which you can access through the Weber County Library web site if you have a library card number. Did a pretty thorough search for references to Weber County Forum by name, and came up with four hits: A news article by John Wright about Dori Mosher's posts when she ran against Jesse Garcia in '05; Dian's obituary last December; and two opinion columns, both more than a year ago. (Our blogmeister tells me that the S-E actually did a story about wcforum when it was first starting up, but I can't find that story.)
I find this lack of coverage pretty astonishing, when you consider the amount of space the S-E devotes to Ogden City politics and the amount of information (and rumor and gossip and name-calling) about Ogden City politics that appears on this blog. In this respect the S-E reminds me of Sergeant Schultz: "I see nothing!"
Every once in a while the editors must realize how ridiculous it looks for them to ignore blogs, so they lash out with an anti-blog editorial, or in this case, with an anti-blog feature story. But they still can't quite bring themselves to mention Weber County Forum, the most relevant blog to their news coverage. At least not by name. So they pick on some other blog that's totally irrelevant to Ogden politics. Sheesh.
I wonder if newspapers treated television the same way, back when TV was new. If they did, they've since outgrown it. Now it's quite common for newspaper articles to acknowledge that something has already been reported on TV. The newspaper also distributes TV program listings to its readers, and devotes two whole pages in every Sunday's feature section to articles about TV shows.
It's about time for the S-E editors to grow up and start treating the internet in a similar way.
In regards to the Wavier and Justification that Godfrey put together on 12 June, 2007, I find the justification rather weak. The individual within the firm that the mayor was suggesting be involved in the study has expertise in the area of fiscal impact analysis, transportation and land use according to the justification, thus leading one to believe that the firm would actually do their own forensics. Yet this person and the firm relied solely on the information provided by the city rather than doing any work independent of what the city provided as indicated in the firm’s report. In other words, the firm only detailed the city’s promotional efforts and lent their good name to provide credibility to the administrations’ pipedream. Sixteen plus thousand dollars is a high dollar amount for what they provided and a low dollar amount for the firm to compromise their own credibility. In my opinion this is a weak justification for the city to pay the firm a fee if all they are going to do is plagiarize the mayor’s high level guesstimates.
Reading the e-mails in Rudi's opener also made me realize why the mayor needed this wavier. He needed this wavier as one of the minimum requirements from UTA so that the UTA would free up the funds to pay the city for having done the study. UTA wanted proof that the mayor was authorized to spend the dollars the way he was spending them and that he had followed proper city and Fed rules in order to spend those funds. Hopefully UTA will withhold the funds when they look at the dates on the study and the wavier, realizing that the study was done prior to the wavier and not done in accordance with City or Federal requirements. I can't see the UTA supporting illegal actions by the administration.
It also concerns me that this is the same firm that the City Council will use to look at our water, storm water and sewer system. If they are willing to compromise their firm’s name for dollars, what are they going to produce for us on this latest study? Will this study simply represent what the administration wants the study to say or will they actually do an independent study and further how will we ever know the difference? The City Council should reconsider or stop the use of this firm, in light of the question as to whether they can provide the city with an independently generated, accurate study that represents what the rate structures for the city infrastructure should actually be.
I also note that this firm specialty is financial structuring, not infrastructure engineering. If the City Council has hired the firm for anything other than to development of rate structures for our city utilities, then they have chosen the wrong firm. An engineering firm would be required to study our system’s future physical structural needs and frankly this engineering study should be done first before we do a study on rates as the future capital requirements should be part of any rate structure study.
This leads me to suspect the true motivations for the use of this firm at this time, irrespective of the fact that the city says that this was the only company to submit a bid for the study. I have personally bid out several projects in my career and there are several ways to structure a bid offer so only end up with one bidder, if that is what you want.
According to the Wavier and Justification Memorandum, a copy of the Wavier and Justification is to be filed with the office of the City Council as required by city ordinance 4-2B-9(G). I am curious if Bill Cook provided the City Council with a copy of this wavier, explained what the wavier was for to the Council, or whether he buried it from the City Council? If it was presented to the Council, was it explained to the Council that the study had already been done and that the city had already received a bill for the study? I seriously doubt that the Council would have accepted this wavier or not made it public had they known what it was for.
It would be very interesting to read the Appendix A referred to in the LYRB "Ogden Gondola Fiscal Impact Analysis", this is where the detailed list of all assumptions used in preparing this analysis are located.
If anyone knows how to get a copy of this Appendix A so that it could be posted here on the blog I'm sure that there would be a lot of good information there that would shed additional light on what Godfrey was trying to do. We may learn alot more about the individual components of this grand scheme.
Could be some very valuable information in there.
Former Candidate:
I know the Fire Fighters Association has not officially endorsed any candidate yet. I know the Police Association has and will not endorse a candidate, especially after what happened to Officer Matt Jones. I have never said I represent any association.
I've been a cop for many years and I see and talk to many cops and firefighters. I'm sure there are some that don't share my views. But the individual cops and fire fighters I talk to, all respect and want Neil Hansen to be our Mayor. Hansen has gone to bat for us on many issues. If you think like Mayor Godfrey and Chief Greiner? Then I guess I’ll be the next fired Officer for speaking my mind? I hope they don’t come after you the way they came after Officer Matt Jones and his family. Hansen understands our needs to get the job done.
By the way, I have not heard one cop or fire fighter say anything negative about Hansen; they have plenty of reasons to speak out against Godfrey and other city council officials.
Curm: You raise an interesting question when you speculate whose fingerprints are on the 250K earmark for the gondola study. Unfortunately, the legislative history of appropriations acts never extends to the identity of the instigator. Once in awhile a news story will reveal it. But these disclosures come from reporters; Congress itself never tips its hat. Bennett, as a member of the Appropriations Committee, could very well be behind it, but Hatch, as a senior member of the Finance Committee (and senior to Bennett), often gets what he wants. I have yet to see any evidence, however, that Bishop is taken seriously on Capitol Hill; I doubt he has the clout.
MM:
My Party made requiring legislators to identify, by name, the earmarks they insert in bills a campaign issue.
Sadly, My Party's older Senators, pork-meisters all, have prevented that from happening. The only good sign is the newly-elected Democrats who campaigned hard on the Culture of Corruption issue are raising a stink.
I was pleased to see Sen. McCaskle [sp?], newly eleced Dem Senator from Missouri, announcing today that she will introduce a resolution to block the legislator's proposed pay raise this term. If she can get it to the floor she may force the reprobates to actually stand up and vote on the record to give themselves more money. Be interesting to see if she gets enough support from other newbies and worried Republicans to force the issue to a roll call vote. If she can, I suspect the raise will die.
Post a Comment