One bold mayoral candidate declines to "take the newspaper's bait"
Amidst a sea of genuinely "ripe" issues churning around Emerald City's upcoming municipal election, we were amused to see what the Standard-Examiner deemed, in this morning's edition, to be pressing front page news.
As the lumpencitizens of Emerald City sit on the edges of their seats, awaiting Ace Reporter Schwebke's reporting on the positions of all mayoral candidates concerning last Friday's Ogden Sierra Club "bunkerbuster" press release, (and the pending State Auditor's examination of the American Can transactions,) our very most favorite Std-Ex reporter apparently received a tangential assignment -- to pose what presently remains a hypothetical question -- "Can you be Ogden mayor and a lawmaker at the same time?"
This morning's Std-Ex article reveals that Mr. Schwebke probably expended substantial effort in recent days tracking down various mayoral candidates and other "experts," each of whom (with the exception of Rep. Neil Hansen) responded with what we consider a to be a knee-jerk "no." The term "conflicts" also come up in a couple of the quotes. Rep. Hansen's response was far more thoughtful than that of any of the other quoted respondants, in our opinion. "I'll cross that bridge when I come to it," Hansen told the Standard-Examiner on Wednesday.
We've considered this same question ourselves over past weeks, and we confess we've been unable to come up with a simple "yes or no" answer either. As we see it, Representative Hansen's "potential" conflicts break down into two key areas. We'll attempt to address them briefly here, one-by-one. We don't pretend however to have the ultimate answer; and when our short analysis is completed, we'll turn the discussion over to our readers.
1) Conflicting constituencies. If elected to the mayoral office without resigning his house seat, Representative Hansen would be representing two technically-distinct constituencies: The people of Emerald City in general, and the folks who reside in Ogden's house legislative district 9, a district apparently completely overlapped by Emerald City's physical boundaries. In considering whether these two constituencies have substantially differing political interests, we're inclined to believe that they don't.
2) Conflicting time constraints. As most of our gentle readers are well aware, our current mayor, Boss Godfrey, who has acted as the business agent for his crony Chris Peterson (and contrarily to the interests of many of the citizens of Ogden) for the entirely of at least the past two years, isn't the first person we'd ask for ethical advice. But he does raise an interesting question regarding time constraints for a mayoral candidate who might not be immediately ruling out a dual legislative-mayoral role. Boss Godfrey mentions that he devotes sixty hours per week to "working," (about which we'll say many of us wish he'd cut back his hours.) Although he is quoted as characterizing such a dual role as a "real challenge;" he nevertheless doesn't characterize it as an impossibility. And for a recent example of a currently serving legislator who effectively serves a similar dual role, we need look no further than Emerald City's own Police Chief/State Senator Jon Greiner. Would the sheer constraints of available time prevent a legislator/mayor from adequately serving his constituents? Frankly we do not know. It doesn't however appear to pose much of a problem for Chief Greiner, we hastily observe.
Two other important points from today's article:
1) Representative Hansen makes it quite clear that whatever his decision, his primary obligation would be to serve the citizens of Ogden; and,
2) He is still nurturing hope of bringing several bills to the legislative floor for votes. One of these, NOT mentioned by Ace Reporter Schwebke, is his Anti-Ticket Quota Bill, which narrowly failed to make it to the Senate floor by a tied 2-2 Senate comittee vote last legislative session. In our opinion, all of Rep. Hansen's percipient legislation is important, not only to the citizens of Ogden, but to Utah residents in general. We believe that it is thus imperative for Rep. Hansen to arrange for these bills to be carried forward by some other legislator, before he commits to resigning his house seat, upon his still-hypothetical election as Emerald City mayor.
We also believe that if elected mayor, Representative Hansen will make the obvious practical decision, and devote himself full-time to managing the affairs of our city as our new mayor. Nevertheless, we congratulate him at this early juncture for not "playing it safe," and for his heretofore decision not to take the "Standard-Examiner's bait" -- and answer a hypothetical question better suited for one of those preposterous Standard/Net online polls.
And one other thing -- just for fun. Imagine the following scenario: a certain Ogden police chief/state senator (Greiner) who reports on his regular day job to an Ogden mayor/house representative (Hansen.) The possibilities in this also-hypothetical fact-set are quite delicious, we think.
Take it away, gentle readers. Web-surfers all over cyberspace are waiting to know what YOU think.
© 2005 - 2014 Weber County Forum™ -- All Rights Reserved
46 comments:
The story mostly consists of Mr. Schwebke asking Rep. Hansen if he will stay on as state Rep. if he is elected Mayor of Ogden, Hansen's reply, and then what others [in and out of the city] think of the question, including Ms. Hooser and our present Mayor, Matthew Godfrey.
A few fast observations:
1.The question is a fair one.
2.I'd have preferred an unequivocal answer from Rep. Hansen instead of "we'll have to see."
3. Good that the SE considers Hansen's victory in the race such a great probability that it thinks speculations about what he will do in office belongs on the front page.
4. I find it passing strange that the SE was eager to learn Ms. Hooser's opinions on this question, but still has not asked her where she stands on Rep. Hansen's asking for, and getting, the state auditor to look into the Godfrey Administration's handling of the city's grants money. Curious, that.
5. Mayor Godfrey says he works 60 hours a week at being Mayor. Impressive, until you realize that that includes all those hours running his dog-and-pony show evening selling sessions for the Peterson Proposal he now considers to have been not feasible right from the start. And god knows how many other hours every week trying to peddle the idea of selling the city's parklands to his crony for a real estate development, and trying to repair the damage of independent consultants having rated his gondola obsession as not a viable transit option for the city. Not to mention how much time it must have taken trying to hide the city's involvement in commissioning and arranging payment for the financial analysis of the now he-says defunct Peterson proposal, and trying to keep the city council, the Standard Examiner and the public from learning what he was up to. Of course he had to work overtime....
6. Also passing strange, or beginning to be so, that the SE has so far printed not a word about the recently GRAMA uncovered emails which detail the Godfrey administration's apparently frantic attempts to hide its actions on the financial analysis matter, and desperate attempts to get UTA to violate its own procedures to help the Mayor cover up what his administration had done. Not a word. Imagine that.
The question posed to Hansen is completely relevant, even if it remains at this point only hypothetical. But my decision, for one, on whether to vote for Hansen depends on his answer. I believe the mayor's job is a full time one and wouldn't vote for Hansen if I thought he was going to keep his state house seat. I may not vote for Hansen for other reasons, too, but the answer to this question is, again, for me very relevant.
Lastly, I certainly hope that when we Rep Hansen says he will cross that bridge when he gets to it he doesn't mean if he wins the mayoral election. I hope he makes his decision long before then.
Following in the spirit of some using "classical" nom de plumes here on the WCF, I would like to nominate Mr. Schwepke for the name of - Nero.
Nero Schwepke! Kind of has a nice ring to it. He does remind me of the legend of Nero fiddling while Rome burned!
Here are these two incredible scandals brewing about the mayor and city which he is currently ignoring while he writes front page articles about something as speculative and unimportant as what Hansen might do with his legislative seat if elected mayor in 3 months from now!
Way to go Nero! A great service you are doing for the citizens of Rome - er I mean Ogden.
In an attempt to ask “find out” questions only leads to answers of understanding. In this whole article, what is the opinion of Suzy? Is she even up on current events? The transparent retort by Rep. Neil Hansen is the least from being rhetorical. It shows the competency of his forethoughts and reasoning as to what he plans to do in the future. Seems to me, he is thinking ahead and planning ahead. Last time I checked, the Navy doesn’t suggest tactics at a briefing of how to run through a mine field. I also find it interesting that the Mayor works (6o hrs a week) but yet can never be reached in his office, just appears to be another under statement to make my ears ring (is it music, or a dog whistle?)
Whatever the decision of Rep. Hansen will be, I can see him upholding his integrity of keeping his word and doing what is in the best interest of the public.
I'm just still slightly bent about Van Hooser deciding to get into the race. I love her, and she's great, but I'm afraid that she's about to become the Ralph Nader of Ogden politics.
Hansen would be able to weather this S-E crap just fine, especially given the great amount of foot-shooting Godfrey does to himself on his own. But with Van Hooser there to soak up fence-sitters, who knows where this will end up?
Will someone please politely suggest to Van Hooser that she withdraw; she's getting no traction and she can't win because she isn't a Mormon.
Hansen says his mind is not made up. What the hell is wrong with that? I appreciate any politician who'll readily admit he's still weighing the options, and not shooting from the hip and playing politicly PC.
What's the rush? The primary isn't even for another 5 weeks.
And I'll also give him extra credit for not playing it politicly safe like all the other candidates did, just because Scott Schwebke had an article deadline.
The more I hear about Hansen, the more I like him.
"Boss Godfrey, who has acted as the business agent for his crony Chris Peterson..."
There is nothing wrong with this. It's what sophisticated modern politicians call "partnering with the private sector."
I had to giggle a bit at how hard Schwebke worked to avoid mentioning Greiner. The question was limited (he said) to acting mayors and council members who are also state legislators.
All I could think of was why didn't he ask Greiner how much a drain on his time holding both offices entails.
Help for Nero, as you reveiw the information,(all the info) provided in Dan's GRAMA, I am sure you have access to it. Clearly you can taste the strong flavor and smell the pungent odor of fraud.
Also sweet nero, take note of how creative they've become, in trying to get that firm paid. Please look at the new study this firm has contracted out with the council, the council said they would spend $50,000 on the study, the final price is $67,000, that just a tad over the combination of the $50,000 plus what the mayor or UTA now owes. You need to be direct with Bill Cook. Does he know more than he's saying? Do some real poking nero (Schwebke).
Manager:
"Partner" never has been and never will be a verb. Nor is "patron."
Polster b
Have to disagree with your position on "partner" not being a verb. That would be like saying "ain't" ain't a legit word. It didn't used to be, but now is. Living languages evolve, only "dead" ones like Latin stay the same.
Language evolves with useage. It is extremely common now in industry, acadamia and general use to use "partner" as a verb. As in Bill Partnered with Pat to produce Alicia. Or GM partnered with Toyota on hybrid research, etc etc.
If you are going to lecture us on language useage, maybe you ought to bone up on your own knowledge of it?
Polster
PARTNER
verb [ trans. ] be the partner of: young farmers who partnered Isabel to the village dance. • [ intrans. ] associate as partners : I never expected to partner with a man like you.
Dean:
The question wasn't about campaign tactics. It was, simply, "do you consider the job of Ogden's Mayor to be a full time job or not?" We can argue, certainly, about whether putting that question to Rep. Hansen and his answer was front page news. {I don't think it was. Top of Utah section, maybe, but front page?} It's the sort of question that should have been put to him by opponents, not the SE.
But once it was put to him, I think he made a mistake in ducking it. There are many questions a candidate can be asked to which "I'll have to think on that some before I can answer" is not only a good answer but the best answer. "Do you think the job you're running for is a full time job" is not one of them.
Oxford American
Well, "partner" wouldn't be a verb if Gore had gotten in. I blame it on Bush.
Curmudgeon
Why do you beat around the bush so much?
Squirrel Patrol alert! Naw, just ruffling the pristine and divinely balanced, mercurial mental feathers of Good Old (?) Curmudgeon, who knows everything and can articulate thusly any position, although these laborious discourses are always fraught with the passivity that's all too common from academics: "It makes sense, I think." Rather than, "I think it makes sense." Must I diagram your sentences for you? You'd do well to have a diagram in front of you to remind you of how the active voice can improve your writing, I sense. I and the rest of my fellow squirrel protectors who abhor Wayne Peterson's famed Squirrel Patrol, a cadre of aged gravy-training asshats in Patagonia vests who sweep for nut caches and dream of riding golden gondolas from block to block, from Starbucks to the Lighthouse Lounge, will always think it's funny. And our mayor will always be Lying Little Matty Gondola Godfrey. Psssshaw! Really, there is a Squirrel Patrol alert in this threadjack: the morons on the local chamber board are now infighting because they want to endorse Lying Little Matty Gondola Godfrey, but the teeny gondola freak himself is on the same board. How will it all turn out???!!! Will the voters know to vote against the chamber endorsee? I hope so, if THE SKI IS [TO BE] BEAUTIFUL BLUE.
Nuts! Get 'em!
native,
I don't see the connection between Nader and Van Hooser. Nader impacted the final outcome helping Bush win; Van Hooser will mostly impact the primaries (where either VH or Neil will likely proceed to face off Godfrey in the final election). If VH and Neil and Godfrey were all running together in the final election then I could see it being more of an issue.
I don't agree w/ the "no traction" statement either (although I think she does need to get out there more as the primaries are approaching). I've heard her name a lot recently, particularly by the FOMs. Seems to me (I could be wrong) that the FOMs fear her more so than they do Hansen. Seems to me that if VH and Godfrey were to face off, that VH would win. If it were Hansen v. Godfrey, Godfrey would win. That's just my gut feeling (pure speculation, I suppose) and if it comes down to that I hope I am wrong. I just think VH is more electable by those who actually vote in Ogden.
Jill,
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't thing Van Hooser is Mormon. What more do I need to say? This is Utah. Granted, the Mormon population in Ogden is lower than Pleasant View, but still...
That is a good point native. Most (if not all) mayors that I know of in Ogden have been LDS over the past few decades (although I am not sure who they ran against, were they Mormon or Non-mormon?). I would certainly hope people in Ogden don't vote solely on one's religion. What about gender? Ogden's never had a female mayor, either. Is this an issue? It hasn't been in other places recently (Olene Walker..first guv of Utah, Kathleen Close...first female commander at HAFB Logistics, Ann Millner...first prez at Weber State).
Jill and Native:
The Constitution of the US flatly bans any religious test for holding public office. I'd like to think the oh-so-Constitution-loving voters of Utah [they scream out their love of the Constitution with the likes of Sean Hannity and his ilk cheerleading every "Stadium of Fire" event and in endless letters to editors] will honor that Constitution, and the founders they profess to respect so much, by refusing to apply a religious test to candidates for the office of Mayor of Ogden City. That they'll vote for whoever they think will be best for Ogden City, based on past performance, experience, stated plans for the future and other qualifications like demonstrated integrity in office, etc., and not on where the candidate worships on Sunday... or Saturday... or even whether he or she worship at all.
I know, I know, the voters often fall short of my high expectations. [Proof: G. Bush is president, Rob Bishop is Ogden's Congressman and Orin Hatch just won re-election as Senator.] But hey, I'm a liberal. I think people... all people.... can learn and grow and behave better in the future than they may have in the past. Even Republicans.
Hansen's with his huge ego thinks that he could do an effective job as Ogden's Mayor and hold a legislative position at the same time. That is ludicrous. Does he have more hours in a day then the rest of us? If I were hiring a full tme management position I would never hire someone who also wanted to hold onto their past full time demanding job at the same time. This is crazy to even discuss. He should have answered saying that this new job as Mayor would take precedence. That would tell me that he really wants it and plans on doing it right. It is either prestige or profit that governed that answer. Who the hell does he think he is, supermayor or superleg? I say he is neither. He just lost my vote, Susy here we come. And how excellent to have a woman and a non mormon running our city. She is a bright lady and asks good questions and I think she would always do what she thinks is fair and right. Hansen keep your other day job and bow out of the race if it does not take priority for you.
It is obvious that this blog site is supporting Hansen for Mayor.
Open Minded:
It is obvious that many people posting here support Hansen. It is as obvious that others who post here support Ms. Hooser. Just as it is obvious that some posting here seem not to have decided yet who they will vote for. That's about what I'd expect on a public affairs blog that welcomes comments.
"She (VH) is a bright lady and asks good questions..."
Oh yeah? Well I think it's time she started ANSWERING a few questions. Two weeks into a short primary campaign and she still hasn't given us a clue what she stands for.
So far her campaign boils down to NOT being Matt Godfrey or Neil Hansen.
Here's a reality check for you, open minded.
If you are reading this blog, and the comments posted herein, and if you are of an honest mind -- you'll be compelled to admit that there's no consensus here at all, as to the question of which mayoral challenger will be best to oust the thoroughly evil Boss Godfrey from his ninth-floor mayoral chair.
We'd like to remind everyone that WCF administrators will support any "live and breathing" candidate who survives the primary, and shows up in the general election to oppose "The little Lord from Hell."
Be nice to all the challengers, people. Let's have no bitternes amongst us as we move from the September 11, 2007 primary, into the November general election.
Let's just try to keep our eyes on the ball, fellow lumpencitizens.
Native, keep in mind that there are some non-LDS persons on the city council, even some holding the city-wide at-large seats. While you are correct, I think, that LDS voters in Ogden are more likely to vote for an LDS candidate than a non-LDS candidate and vice-versa, it would be a tragedy if no gentiles ran for public office in Ogden simply because they aren't LDS. Always important that those in the minority in a community at least seek office.
Oh, and open-minded, don't forget that some posters on this forum actually have supported Godfrey (unfortunately, they don't usually make a very reasoned case for him).
How absurd said:
"Hansen's with his huge ego thinks that he could do an effective job as Ogden's Mayor and hold a legislative position at the same time"
Well, that was a pretty absurd leap if you ask me! In re-reading the article I could find absolutely nothing that Hansen said that could cause any thinking person to conclude what you have.
What he said is that he "would cross that bridge when he came to it" The reporter and others he interviewed filled in the rest of the chatter that was in this piss poor excuse for a front page article.
And if you think Hansen has a huge ego, well I would say your talking through your hat and you obviously don't know him. If anything, he is probably way too humble for this job that has been occupied by the biggest misplaced ego in Ogden history for the last seven years.
You really ought to engage your brain before you turn your fingers loose on the keyboard, assuming you have an engageable brain that is, which based on your post is rather doubtful.
Curm, I would hope that people are not using a religious test but understanding anothers religious beliefs defninately can help someone make a decision.
All else being equal (an obvious impossibility) I would probably vote for the LDS candidate. But I look at other qualifications and stances before I look at religion in making my choice in an election.
If you think Hatch and Bishop won because they are LDS, I question your sanity. They won because their positions align with more of their constituents than their opponents did. The margin might have been bigger because they were LDS.
I also think that women can do a great job in elected positions. I have and would vote for a woman over a man because she was a woman.
As for Hansen's response to the question, I don't live in Ogden but I didn't live in South Ogden and when Garwood said he would not give up his mayors position, he lost my support.
Ozboy... wouldn't it be great if everybody had your awesome brain and knowledge. Blogs are for opinions and thoughts and ideas no matter how absurd. Right? Well read here and you will see. I am sure you are always right. Then why didn't Hansen just answer the question as saying he would devote his full attention to the job as Mayor that he was running for rather then an indecisive answer as he did? It is obvious you are a Hansen fan so what is the point of the discussion. Many are already set in stone as to whom they want here as long as it is not Godfrey.
How Absurd
It is obvious you are not a Hansen fan, so what is the point of the discussion?
I know Hansen and Ozboy and I can say that you are wrong about both of them.
And given Mayor Godfrey's performance and zeal for dishonesty and secrecy I really don't see anything wrong with people being for any one but him. I know I am.
Personally I am for Suzy, but I would like to hear what the other two stealth candidates have to say before I make up my mind.
I just can't help but think the SE is in lying little matty's pocket.
In fact I'm witnessing it now.
Unreported major scandals, as only lying little matty can create them, and here we're nit picking,with our eyes totally off the target, Hansen, Van Hooser, let me be folks. We have the worst lying crooked little mayor in the world here,and yes he has been known to use his religion as a campain tool,(should embarrass any true believing Mormon) The purpose of every thinking, honest, mature adult,(that hasn't been asleep for the last 7+ years) should be, anybody but lying little matty pinnoccio gondola godfrey.
As my old hitting coach always said, keep your eyes on the ball.
I agree with Bill C, I think that the primary season has just started and we need to hear what Hansen and VH have to say about their intentions with regards to managing the city.
What programs do they support, where do they see problems within the city that need to be addressed and how will they move this city forward in a positive way. Issues that they will need to be well thought out and will reflect what I personally will need to hear before I select who I will vote for.
Until I hear their postions on these issues and others that they may outline, I consider the off the cuff comments made by either Hansen or VH to be just that.
Let's keep our eye on the big picture, let's let these candidates get their positions out to the public before we determine who is the better candidate.
Remember, anyone but godfrey.
Arcritic:
In re: If you think Hatch and Bishop won because they are LDS, I question your sanity. They won because their positions align with more of their constituents than their opponents did. The margin might have been bigger because they were LDS.
I didn't intend to suggest they won because of their religions. I was using them as a slightly tongue in cheek example [but only slightly] of how "the voters often fall short of my high expectations." I thought the elections of Bush II, Bishop and Hatch were pretty good evidence of that....
You also wrote: Curm, I would hope that people are not using a religious test but understanding another's religious beliefs definately can help someone make a decision. All else being equal (an obvious impossibility) I would probably vote for the LDS candidate.
Well, on both points we disagree. First, I said I didn't think someone's religious affiliation [or lack thereof] should come into election decisions [Is he LDS? Is he Catholic? Is he Baptist? Is he Zoroastrian? Is he an atheist?] You broadened it a little to "understanding someone's religious beliefs" mattering in election choices. Not precisely the same question.
For example, if I understood a candidate's religious beliefs required him [or her] to impose those beliefs, or social policies derived from them, upon the rest of the citizenry who did not share those beliefs, it would definitely figure into my voting decisions. But since I know people of many faiths who would love to impose their beliefs on the rest of us and others from the same faiths who would not, merely voting on the basis of their religion would not be valid. At least as far as the mainstream religions are concerned. [Leaving out for example white power Christian extremist faiths that want to eliminate "mud people" and so on. The true whackos.]
I could not, myself, go so far as to say, as you did, that all other things being equal [or what I suspect is the equivalent, knowing little or nothing about two candidates] that one being LDS would determine your vote. Seems to me the healthy choice, citizenship wise, is to leave religious affiliation out of the equation. Always. [Whackos excepted.]
Y'all-
Let me provide furthur clarification to my position. GODFREY will use his religion and his Priesthood to create a divisive advantage if he is up against someone who is either non-Mormon or female (doesn't hold the Priesthood). It is well within his character bounds to do so. That is why I would like to see Hansen go up against him. Hansen is Mormon and holds the Priesthood, which takes that completely away from Godfrey.
Why do I believe Godfrey would stoop to this level? Because he is a racist, and specifically anti-hispanic. He's already trying to gain a dividing, wedge advantage with this one.
He is a liar. This is well established.
He has no regard for the rule of law. Again, well established.
What makes you think he will not use religion as a dividing, wedge issue? Now is not the time to let him get away with this. I admit it's weak and unprincipled, but these are some of the fundamental reasons I support Hansen.
In a different time, I would even throw in Republican. But right now the GOP is in such disarray and the Iraq Occupation is such an unmitigated disaster, I think the more that Godfrey looks, sounds, and is associated with George W. Bush, the better for his opponent. And he does strike an uncanny similarity to Bush.
Where is the real problem???? The UNITED STATE CONSITUSTION Already allows the Vice President of the United States which is clearly the second most powerful man in the executive branch to hold office, to also be the leader of the senate which is the other branch of the Federal government, so he has the dual role. That the way it has always been since own government had been formed over two hundred years now.
So, to all of you that belongs to the Mathew Godfrey support group! The real answer is; it is “All to do about nothing”….I call that the Jerry Seinfeld political party, where you all make, “It all to do about Nothing”, but then “You blow off Huge Mountains as though they are in Insignificant”. Now that is what I call arrogant and ignorant.
Curm,
Karl Rove has been taking advantage of your high-minded ideals for years now. And guess what, we've been on the losing end. I'm sick of it!
Put your good liberal sense aside and roll up your sleeves. This is politics. We need to level the playing field and start swinging for the fences. Everything goes. You'll see. By the time the results are in, Godfrey will be so red-faced and spittin mad, he'll have an aneurism. But it has to be done nasty.
One advantage the little guy has is that he's the incumbent. The disadvantage he has is that he has to run on his record. He's said a lot of things. His people have said a lot of things.
concerned citizen-
Nice non-sequiter rant! Are you trying to be funny? LOL
To native,
I disagree with you observation that godfrey looks like Bush in your post above " And he does strike an uncanny similarity to Bush".
I just got done watching the TV show 2 1/2 Men and godfrey is a spitting image of the character that plays the inept loser brother on the show. For that matter godfrey also matches the characterization played by that actor.
He may look like that character,
but he really really looks like, and has about the same character qualities as Paul Rubens AKA Pee Wee Herman!
How absurd
Well, at least my mother and I agree with you on how great it would be if every one was as smart as me. Alas, we are probably in the minority! In fact if you polled the Godfreyites I would guess that 99 & 9/10th of them would say I am a complete idiot! And do you know what, from their POV they just might be right!!
And if I were always right, like you assert, wouldn't it be a wonderful world! Unfortunately I'm wrong a whole lot of the time, especially when I shoot from the hip. Hell, I might have even been wrong about you! After all, we do agree that "Blogs are for opinions and thoughts and ideas no matter how absurd." Hopefully you extend that to my thoughts and ideas as well.
I'm just trying to have a good time and do the best I can with the limited amount of grey matter the good lord gave me to work with. Same as most of us that play on this site.
Sorry to offend you, but I still think you were way off the mark in your interpretation of what Hansen said to Schwepke in this morning's article. For instance, nowhere did Hansen say he "thinks that he could do an effective job as Ogden's Mayor and hold a legislative position at the same time" as you accuse him of. The article may have implied that, but those were Schwepke's and other's words, not Hansen's.
Basically what Hansen said was that he would cross that hypothetical bridge when he came to it, and that he places the citizens of Ogden first in his thoughts and actions - or words to that effect.
Count me in with those who would find any one other than Godfrey as acceptable. If that is Hansen, great, Van Hooser equally good, Thompson OK, Buster the Pot Belly Pig would even do better than Godfrey in the integrity department.
NEWS FLASH
On May 1st the City Council under pressure from the administration adopted a mixed use zoning ordinance. Fortunately the Council had the wisdom to only apply the very wide open ordinance to the River Front Project and downtown areas of the city. The Council knew the administration would not be happy with their decision to only include the River Front project in their approval but the Council also didn’t want to be viewed as standing in the way of something that was already in progress within the city.
The administration is now pressuring the Council to pass the rest of the administrations mixed use ordinance that would include areas outside of the downtown, River Front Project and designated redevelopment areas. In other words the administration want the ordinance to apply to anywhere in the city where the administration wants it to apply, i.e. a door opener for development in our foothills. Additionally most of the approval processes and exceptions that most Ogdenites didn’t like and that were limited to the River Front Project, thus held captive, would now apply anywhere within the city if this expansion of the ordinance is approved.
I was of the opinion that the Council, last go around on this ordinance, had sent a strong message to the administration that they did not want this mixed use ordinance to be an open door for developers to develop anywhere in the city that they wanted. The Council wanted the city to be the determiner as to where and when mixed use would be applied, not the developers. The Council should inform the administration that they have already voted what they are willing to do relative to additional mixed use applications within the city for the time being and that when some of the current mixed use projects are completed, that then would be the time to further review the current ordinance not 3 months after the ordinance was enacted and not before any of the covered projects have even been started.
This latest effort by the administration is being done behind closed doors and without citizen involvement. The Council should in their next work session tell the administration that they have provided the administration with all that they are willing to provide them with in regards to mixed use until some of the current projects are completed and until we’ve learned how well our current ordinance works. The Council has spoken, now tell the administration to back off and lets move on to other city business.
Concerned residents should contact all City Council members to express their concerns before the Council’s next work session that is scheduled for this Thursday evening.
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. I strongly disagree. No Police Association in Utah has the guts to endorse a Candidate. Most associations don’t want to their members to be retaliated against, like what Officer Matt Jones went through. 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 next 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.
Neil Hansen understands our needs, to protect your family and my family.
By the way my licence number is (Godfrey stinks)
By the way my other car's licence number is (Greiner stinks)
The upcoming Council work session meeting (closed door meeting in regards to public input)regarding the amendments to the Mixed Use Ordinance would be an excellent time for the Council to simply tell the administration NO or amend the existing ordinance by adopting an overlay approach toward mixed use developments within the city.(i.e. send the planning department back to draft a more workable and more understandable plan).
Overlays that would be site specific and specific to each projects based on specific locations within the city, identified by the city, where the city detemines mixed use should be allowed and consistent with the general plan. Overlays that would each need City Council approval prior to being incorporated into the overall ordinance.
Otherwise the amendments to the ordinance that the administration is proposing that Council adopt will totally negate the will of the people as they have expressed in their community plans within the city. This revision to the ordinance will override the community plans within the general plan.
The Councils effort to contain the genie in the bottle by limiting the current ordinance to the river project was fine as long as it was only applied to the river project, but if the current ordinance is allowed to expand beyond the river project boundaries, there is enough leaway in that document's provisions to let the genie out of the bottle.
Coucil should reject the administrations efforts to expand the ordinance to cover the entire city or require the planning department to go back to the drawing board and come up with a new ordinance that would require the application of specific overlay zones.
I believe that this whole issue of having hansen say that he would resign is just another way for the godfrey admin. to kill anything that he may have in the works. As soon as hansen says he is going to give up his working in the leg.
then maybe the audit will go away, and that the check and balance of the taxpayers money is now slid under the carpet, and the legistation that has or he will be running to protect the firefighters from not having a civil service commission. I think what Rep. Hansen said was by far the smartest thing a canidate could do in his situatation, He knows how this political game is played and he is wise to his (godfrey's) to all the tricks that they will try to use. So I would suggest that some of you sit back and learn. I for one know him personally and he is the best of the best when it comes to serving the public. so don't read into to it any more that what it is.
Post a Comment