According to the 2007 Election Countdown Clock which relentlessly "ticks" within our right sidebar, the Emerald City elections loom two weeks from today. And it's in that connection that we are pleased this morning to provide a link to the first set of candidate questionnaire responses to have surfaced in advance of our upcoming elections. Over the weekend, a representative from the Ogden Sierra Club transmitted to us a helpful link to the newly-completed questionnaire which they've uploaded to their website. We incorporate the questionnaire's prefacatory paragraphs here:
To help educate voters about candidates' positions on environmental issues, the Ogden Sierra Club has prepared a candidate questionnaire and sent it to each of Ogden's candidates for mayor and city council. We have posted the candidates' responses in full, linked from their names below. Names without links indicate candidates who have not yet responded. We sincerely thank all of the candidates who have taken the time to answer these detailed questions.We accordingly invite our readers to take a good long look.
We won't comment on the merits of individual responses, at least not at this time. We will however offer our observation, that questionnaires of this type are "useful" in a very broad sense of the word, to a concerned and thinking electorate. Not only do candidate questionnaire responses indicate positions on particular issues, they also provide key insight into the level of public responsiveness which can be expected of aspirants to political office, once responding candidates have successfully ascended to their elective positions. If one mayoral candidate (the usual suspect) for instance, doesn't even demonstrate the interest to respond to nine simple citizen-propounded questions, how much effort will such a candidate be predicted to expend within the upcoming four years, responding to citizen concerns? In the case of mayoral aspirant Boss Godfrey, of course, we already have the answer to the question -- NOT MUCH!
And on the same tangent we take note that there are several council hopefuls who have likewise failed or refused to respond at all. And within the group of those candidates who have responded, several candidates' responses, we believe, reflect perfunctory haste and inattention. Whether they know it or not, even some of those who did respond provided enough information to help us "cull the herd," irrespective of their stated positions on particular issues.
As our readers peruse the several candidate responses, we hope our readers will keep in mind that it's these people with whom we lumpencitizens will be trying to communicate for the next four years.
It's these folks who will be running our town until the year 2012, under a no cut contract with the voters of Ogden.
We would also like to thank the people at the Ogden Sierra Club for preparing the questionnaire, compiling the candidate responses and sending us the link. We did one of these in advance of the 2005 primary election, and we know such a project entails lots of work.
We would also like to again direct our readers' attention to the 2007 election module in our right sidebar. It's been substantially augmented since we last mentioned it here, as candidates have continued to send us their data and website links. Please note that we've also added the above questionnaire to the already-existing links.
So let's open the discussion with the subject matter of the Sierra Club questionnaire, and see where this topic leads us.
33 comments:
Thanks, Rudi.
And thanks to Dan and the Sierra Club for concise and thotful questions.
Neils's answers, IMHO, support his knowledge and years of experience in city gov't and the legislature. He appears to understand the issues and would call on all interested parties to articulate their views and work together. (a novel idea, eh?).
I ask WHY do we need further and alternative studies on the transportation question, as VH purports?
How asinine. We have studies! THE WFRC has told us ad infinitum, that the streetcar is best (and the feds will pay 1/2) and the gondola is out there on Mars.
Stop wasting our money coming up with answers we already have.
Sometimes one wants to appear to be open and fair to the detriment of common sense.
First of all, I trust that VH would do the right thing even if she doesn't say the right thing. Hansen, who has my support, says the right things and will do the right thing.
But notably present, of the group of Gondolists, is Kent Peterson. Good for you, Kent, to even bother to respond. And his responses?
Gondola vs. Streetcar: I'll think about.
Selling off Mount Ogden Park for development: I'll think about it.
Changing the trail system: I went to Switzerland, and I'll think about it.
Mmmm Hmmm....
Personally, my initial gut reaction to the mayoral candidates answeres were that I didn't find much substance in Neil's answers. Sounded more like short soundbites to me, which is fine I suppose. I thought VH gave real and good answers and articulated them pretty well. I'm glad that somebody, VH, is finally taking the FrontRunner into consideration.
sharon,
Without commenting on the candidates' responses themselves, let me just say that no transportation project (streetcar, bus rapid-transit, or gondola) can actually happen unless there are further studies. The studies that have been completed so far have looked at what's feasible and what would be most cost effective, but they've included no site-specific engineering work to nail down the precise costs and impacts. And for a federally funded project (which the streetcar would have to be), environmental laws (blame the Sierra Club) require that there be a formal "alternatives analysis" to ensure that the decision recognizes all the applicable environmental benefits and costs. That hasn't been done yet either, even though an informal look at various alternatives has already taken place and the more formal study would certainly build on the one that's already been done.
By the way, I should point out that most of the credit for conducting this candidate survey does not fall on me. Contrary to the mayor's insinuations, the Ogden Sierra Club does have many other dedicated volunteers.
Neil's responses were clear and concise. That's the essense of good soundbites, of course.
Susie's responses were phrased in the language of bureaucratese gobbledegook. Pretty amazing for someone who's only held public office for slightly under 18 months.
Ogden had streetcars at one time and we spent housands taking them out.
So now why the big rush to have streetcars again?
Buses are much more flexible. They can go anywhere.
Do not build permanent structures that have to be torn out over and over again.
thanx, Dan, for sommenting about the impact satudies that would have to be done. But, as far as the most viable...the streetcar did come in first...and with all being in order, 1/2 would be picked up by the Feds. Right?
Sound bites are good when they convey the message. Look at your news tonite and see how long anyone has to get a point across...soundbite..talking point..both should inform.
You are correct, Practical. Buses can go anywhere. I like what SLC is doing by upgrading their bus system. Catchy ads too.
However, I didn't care for VH's declaration of giiving city employees perks for riding a bus. If it's cheaper for them to ride the bus, then the savings on gas for THEIR cars should be enuf 'perk'...duh.
Practical-
Tracks didn't have to be torn out in the beginning, nor should they have. I think once rebuilt they will be used for many generations to come. Plus, roads alone are not meeting all of our transportation needs. I personally can't wait until the tracks and FrontRunner are fully operational. What a great system. I ride TRAX in SLC, too, what a great system that is.
Sharon-
Why not give incentives for riding the bus? Aren't we trying to improve the environment and reduce our ecological/carbon footprints. My work pays for my bus pass now and both universities I attended provided its faculty and students free passes. It is incumbent upon individuals to make good decisions about the enviornment and communities they live in, but corporations and employers also have a responsibility, too. By providing bus passes the City is providing a great incentive for people getting out of their cars which I think is a laudable goal.
BTW...the SE editoralized in favor of Layton Council sticking to their guns of not giving ANY business coming into Layton or upgrading, a financial handout.
Remember how WalMart wanted to "supersize that"..and wanted some relief. Layton said 'no'. Guess what? After threatening to leave, WalMart supersized as planned on THEIR OWN NICKEL.
Godfrey is so insecure that he has to give away our monies to any carpetbagger with his hand out. Just like the kid who bribes the playground popular gang with gum, candy and a promise to "use my new bat". What a sorry piece of work he is.
I suggest again, mayor: Put your little hand on the next entreprenuer's sleeve and march him to your BFF bank loan officer!
You still get to practice your cronyism with the loan officer.
Of course, the Godfreyites made no secret that they want Moyal's property.
How many of you will volunteer to help Neil Hansen? A humble teachable man with no massive ego to get in the way of being a true servant of the people.
Curious 1: "Why not give incentives for riding the bus?"
Why limit these incentives to city employees? Why not just hand out free passes to the taxpayers who pay all the bills? Why benefit one select group and then deny the same benefits to other groups?
WHile I would be happy to have either Gochnour or Freed as 4th ward councilperson, based on the answers to the Sierra Club questionaire, it seems like Freed is more knowledgeable and would not require as much time to get up to speed on some of these issues as Gochnour. Peterson, on the other hand ... well, as native already hinted (9:29) he'd likely vote to sell off the foothills to the first FOM to come along.
bert-
I never said anything about limiting incentives to city employees. Come up with a system that "hands out free passes to taxpayers" then I might support it. I'm not sure what you mean benefiting one group and denying another is supposed to mean. Please expand. Employees get benefits from their employees all the time. Should all benefits employees recieve (in this case Ogden City employees) be extended to the taxpayer as you suggest in your comment? Don't get your point.
Actually, upon further reflection, I think that we should give every taxpayer a free bus pass. We could take all of the money that has been earmarked or will likely go to future unsustainable road projects (i.e. Northen Legacy Project) and put it towards bus passes and improving our mass transit systems. Sounds good to me.
Having gone back and read some more of the responses, I'd like specifically commend Mr. Youngberg for his complete responses to the questions. I nearly agree with all of his responses, although I concede that the issues are more complex than time and space allow.
I fully support Mr. Youngberg, and at this point, he has my support.
However, with respect to the first question, Mr. Youngberg, I believe you may be referring to the General Plan. Correct me if I'm wrong.
And please excuse me for repeating myself in the second paragraph above. That was dorky.
Curious:
I'm betting that in a decade or two, we will be there. Free transit. An organization of Utah physicians [not a group noticeably liberal in their politics] has warned the legislature that right now --- right now --- 2000 Utahans a year die from breathing the air along the Wastch front. Death by breathing. 2K a year. And they expect the numbers to rise. Given the WF's growing population, expanding number of cars on the road [a major contributor to air pollution], the problem will get worse, not better.
Very soon, stiffer Federal air quality standards [ozone, particulates, etc] which have already been adopted will kick in, and since the Wasatch Front is nudging the federally acceptable number of "red" days [violating Federal standards] now, the expectation is by next summer we will be way over the limit, and Federally mandated steps to get the pollution down will kick in. Expensive federal mandates.
Given all of that, providing free bus service to all makes a great deal of sense. Yes, it will be expensive, but every car taken off the road cuts the pollution we have to deal with, cuts road maintenance funds, cuts traffic, all of which will mitigate the costs some.
Some places already do this, though on a small scale. Park City, for example, provides free excellent bus service. Downtown SLC, downtown Denver provide free transit [though not outside the downtown zone].
If the Utah legislature was smart [pause for extended guffawing here], it would bite the bullet and begin now to issue the passes rather than waiting, as it will, until the problems become hugely larger, the numbers dying become much higher, and the costs of doing something about the problem much greater.
By the way, with free bus service you wouldn't have to issue passes at all. Just hop on, hop off as you please, anytime, all the time. Be interesting to see a study of how that would work --- meaning how much traffic, pollution, etc. it would eliminate --- if it was tried in a substantial sized city.
But it's coming.
Another point about the questionnaires: In the past, the Sierra Club has found that questionnaires are useful but not perfect, for the purpose of determining how knowledgable the candidates are and where they stand. We've never made endorsements on the basis of questionnaires alone--we always conduct an interview with the candidate as well, or in the case of incumbents, look at the candidate's record. So by all means, get what you can out of the questionnaire responses. But I would encourage you to contact candidates directly with follow-up questions that are important to you.
Curm:
I listened to a DR last yr who stated : "About 34,000 !! deaths eash yr could be averted by handwashing".
Couple that with the thousands of deaths attributed to those "super hero employees, students and gen'l population" who think it admirable to go to work, school, and public places while hacking, sneezing, blowing their runny noses (or sniffling to drive one to distraction!). STAY HOME! Quit spreading your disease to everyone else. A dr said that too.....
Common sense.
Curmudgeon
"hugely larger"?
I think this 2000 people a year dying along the Wasatch Front from our dirty air is highly suspect! That would be about eight people a day! That would almost certainly mean that we would all know people that were dropping because of pollution. I don't know any, how many do you know?
I would also like to point out that if you reduced all of that car traffic you would also have a corresponding reduction in the amount of money that goes into the transportation system from those drivers so you would not have the massive savings that your rationale seems to imply.
Public transportation works pretty good in most major metropolisis worldwide, and as far as I can tell it aint free anywhere. I have used it in Tokyo, Osaka, Paris, NYC, London and Stockholm, and it is pretty amazing at the sheer numbers of people that get moved around, and there aint none of them travelling for free that I knew about.
Mass public transportation will happen when the market forces dictate, regardless of what a bunch of politicians try to do to speed it up. In fact the more lame assed politico's that get their fingers in the pie, the more likely they will delay it and for sure screw it up.
Dan S.,
I mostly agree with you. But the to me, the questions seem very apropos and direct. I don't understand why a candidate cannot, in a sentence or two, summarize thier basic position on the issue posed in the question. Obviously some candidates have failed to do this, either through refusal or inability.
I think this opens up other questions regarding just how informed voters are, or should be, with respect to candidates or issues. But the fact is, most voters don't research issues or candidates, and vote anyway. Given this, I think it's a good start for candidates to at least SUMMARIZE thier position so that the 75% (or whatever) of voters who are going to vote without doing in-depth research and conducting interviews of the candidates have at least that to inform them at the polls.
And at this point I will refrain from delving into the whole republic vs. democracy debate (i.e. should we qualify to vote?)
Oz:
I think I said "mitigate the costs some" not "massive savings."
As for the Drs., I am not a physician so I'm taking their claims, coming as they do from those professionally qualified to have an opinion on the matter, seriously. From what I read of their statement, the deaths would not be attributed on death certificates to pollution. They would come from those dying from, say, acute emphysema sooner than they otherwise would have because of pollution. And so on. When they made their appeal to the legislature, which was widely reported, I don't recall anyone challenging their conclusions other than on the feasibility [mostly financial] of doing something about it now. If there is a substantive critique of their mortality claims, I haven't seen it yet, but will be glad to look at it if/when it's made available.
As for your argument from market forces, you're probably right. But that may also mean that the fix, driven by market forces [oh, say $6 a gallon gas and multi-billion dollar pollution abatement projects] may happen far later than they could/should happen to achieve the max amelioration for the minimum [taxpayer] buck.
Also [possibly/probably?] wrong to assume that future conditions will necessarily yield past and present solutions [charge for ride transit]. As circumstances change, what seemed to be unacceptable in the past and present may look very different. We shall see... those of us still around in a couple of decades.
A great service once again provided to the public by the WCF, the Sierra Club, and of course, Dan S.
Dan, what do I make of Ardema not responding? Is it in the works or just showing no interest?
Right now it looks like for me it is still
Freed
Youngberg
Wicks (of course)
These three seem to have a little more of what I feel are hardcore, heartfelt values. (Between VanHooser and Hansen, I'm still looking for the tell tale sign of correct values and the salt to stand up for them. VanHooser is a little bit ahead for me right now but not enough to plant a sign.)
Thanks for helping me decide. Of course, in many races there are those who I could support were they to survive the primary. Thanks to all who are running.
Rudi, can you edit Amy's (excellent) responses so there aren't funny characters where shouldn't be any? Or is it just my browser? Thanks.
See, Amy got it right in question No. 1, it's the GENERAL PLAN. She knows what she's talking about when it comes to planning and zoning. This alone endorses her.
Amy walks her talk with the water issue: she seems to have put some bark and cactus in the front yard.
Amy's transportation answers are well thought out. I think she's on the money with respect to type and corridor.
All candidates on question 8: blah, blah, blah, blah... I got an idea. Let's go down to Rocky Mt. Raceway and burn rented modifieds for a couple of hours (ten gallon minimum), then we'll go up to Pineview and drive around in my boat all day, then we'll take the four-wheelers up to Monte and shoot guns, maybe kill some animals. You tree-huggers are no fun!
Too bad Lying little Matt doesnt share the same thought on the Police and Fire protection as Kent Peterson, but if he gets elected, the Mayor will give Kent a leason or two on the liabilities of having employees who can see through the horse shit the mayor preaches.
This month, the coveted Zion Chutzpah Award goes to.....
Congressman Rob Bishop [Bush Lemming--UT]. I received today a post card from Mr. Bishop, touting his credentials as a fiscal conservative dedicated to reducing government spending. This from the man who voted, docilely for every Bush administration budget busting spending bill [domestic as well as military] for six years. Remember the "Bridge to Nowhere"? Bishop voted for it. Rep. Rob Bishop claiming to be a fiscal conservative is chutzpah positively breathtaking in its audacity.
He goes on to tout his vote for the recent Military Appropriations Bill. This is awkward for him, since he says the bill "had its flaws." [English translation: was denounced by Bishop and his Republican colleagues as a pork-stuffed giveaway by the Democratic Congress.] But he voted for it none the less, and justifies that vote by pointing out how much of the money appropriated would be spent in Northern Utah. [English translation: his home district would get enough of the pork to make it worth his while to over look the rest of it.]
He touts his support for de-fanging the No Child Left Behind bill... meaning putting control of the spending and educational standards back in the states. But he does not oppose a dime of the federal funds to be sent to the states for NCLB. He just doesn't want the federal government to have any say in how it's spent. Fiscal conservatism, western style. [English translation, according to Bernard DeVoto: "Give us money then go away."]
Finally, Rep. Bishop touts his "Advocating for Utah's Transportation Needs." He "announces" federal grants of 2.5 million for Ogden-Hinckley airport, 8.3 million for Brigham City airport, and $80 million for commuter rail development in Utah. [Note: he does not exactly claim credit for getting the money. He just "announced" that the grants had been made.] Strangely he did not "announce" the quarter of a million dollar federal grant to UTA to fund Mayor Godfrey's latest last desperate attempt to study the gondola yet again, which the Mayor has now tried to have UTA use compensate FOM Chris Peterson for the prep work he's done on his [the mayor now says] no-feasible real estate development on the Ogden's public benchlands.
Now why in the world would Rep. Bishop, "fiscal conservative" who nevertheless touts his ability to bring home pork for N. Utah [or to at least imply, by "announcing" such pork that he had much to do with it] not mention the quarter million dollar gondola study grant? What could his motive have possibly been? Tis a puzzlement.
All of which is why Rep. Bishop has been awarded, this month, the coveted "Zion Chutzpah Award." [Rumors that Rep. Bishop intends to enter his postcard to his constituents in a major Creative Fiction contest have not yet been confirmed.]
His postcard also announces several constituent meetings, including one in the North Ogden City Hall [he's staying well clear of Ogden proper apparently]. If anyone goes, tell us how long his nose has grown since he sent the postcard.
And don't miss the notice on the front of the post card... and it's easy to miss because it's in teeny teensy type... the sort you find on the bottom of the back page of your credit card statement. It reads as follows:
" This mailing was prepared, published and mailed at taxpayer expense."
If Rob Bishop is what fiscal conservatism means these days, god help the taxpayers. Congressman Bishop hasn't. And won't.
Since this board has largely gone pro-Hansen (why I don't know, something about fire in his belly???), I hope everyone had an opportunity to see the small article in today's Standard regarding the firefighters endorsement of Susan Van Hooser. I think that their assessment of her was right on the mark. I am voting for her for similar reasons, and I can only hope that a majority of Ogden citizens will as well.
Jill:
You are puzzled by support for Hansen here. I can think of several reasons. First, when no one else seemed to be standing up, willing to run, Hansen was. When no other of our local state legislators --- either party --- was willing to stand up on local issues, Hansen was. The job of mayor, if it is to be done well, requires a Mayor with a proven ability to work across lines, to work at times with a Council that thinks differently than he or she does, without resorting the dissembling, trickery, secrecy and secret handshake deals with cronies. Rep. Hansen has, over his long tenure in the legislature,managed to introduce bills [not co-sponsored with a Republican, but introduced on his own]and get them passed by an overwhelmingly Republican House. He has, in short, substantial experience in government which Ms. Hooser has not.
Not challenging your reasons for preferring Van Hooser, Jill. In the short time she has been on the Council, she has done, I think, well. Only explaining why some people may prefer Hansen instead.
Curmudgeon,
I agree with some of your comments, but I respectfully disagree with your statement that Hansen has introduced on his own bills that have been passed by a Republican House (maybe to a small degree). Yes, he has introduced many bills over the years, but only a very small minority of them have been passed. And the reason why our other state legislators haven't stepped up to stand up for local issues while out of session is because they are not running for mayor. Plus, Hansen isn't squeaky clean. It was reported not too long ago that he accepted Jazz tickets from lobbyists. And from what I recall, he did plan to go to China until there was public opposition to it; he should've made the right call in the first place. Just like he should've said if he were to be the mayor he would give up his legislative seat (if being Ogden's mayor is that important to him). And btw, Susie can work across lines effectively; I've seen her do it and am confident she would be the best at doing so out of the candidates that we have. Don't get me wrong, I like Hansen, but I don't think he is the right choice for this election.
Curmudgeon...I agree with you completely on Hansen. Let us not forget that he has also been a champion of our public servants...fire and police. He knows how city gov't works...how novel and refreshing is that?
He's humble, teachable, listens, and is open to the views of others. He is not egotistical in any way.
He has been helping many private citizens quietly...not advertising his good works. Tho, I wish he would!
He will be a hands-on mayor and friend of the people.
As far as contemplating the trip to China: Has anyone on here ever contemplated something set before them and then on reflection, turned it down?
No? Then you must be tossed about like a rag doll in a puppy's mouth.
Neil was the ONLY one who didn't go....seems to me that demonstrates a man who reflects, reasons, is not easily flattered and wants to do the best for his constituents.
Mayor Neil Hansen
Good 4 Ogden
Jill:
As I said, I'm not challenging your reasons for preferring VH, just offering reasons why some prefer Hansen.
Let me reply to two of your points. You wrote: Yes, he has introduced many bills over the years, but only a very small minority of them have been passed.
I think he got passed, on his own [not joint] introduction about a dozen bills or so. Given a Utah House and Senate that are routinely north of 80% Republican, I think that bespeaks a considerable accomplishment on Hansen's part.
You also wrote: And the reason why our other state legislators haven't stepped up to stand up for local issues while out of session is because they are not running for mayor.
Sorry, but that won't fly. Much that happens locally can, and often does, resonate in the legislature. I expect my representatives to stand up on local matters [use of eminent domain to acquire property for a private business, for example; secrecy in government; ticket quotas as a measure of police performance; city inability to comply with the terms of federal and state grants, etc.] Speaking as a Weber County Democrat, I expect my state representatives to speak out when they see government abuses in their districts, and to bring the state's authority to bear when it's appropriate to correct them. Have any of them asked how or why UTA agreed to be a conduit for another Godfrey gondola study, or why it was [for a time] complicit in assisting the Mayor in hiding that fact from the Council? Hansen has. Where the hell are the rest of our state legislators?
So on that point, Jill, we disagree. "I'm a state representative, what's happening in Ogden is not my concern" is not an acceptable stand, for me, for my state representative or state senator. That Ogden's Democratic representatives take that stand much of the time [Hansen excepted] drives this yellow dog Democrat nuts.
Somebody say AMEN! Brother Curm.
danny,
Aardema's response came in a little late, and is now posted.
Post a Comment