How "low" can the Standard-Examiner go?
By Curmudgeon
Quite an issue of the Standard-Examiner this morning. Remarkable stuff therein. Let's begin with a piece by Mr. Schwebke, reporting that a new gang-crimes unit will hit "the mean streets of Central Ogden" this weekend. And he also reports that "The unit was supposed to begin operating in January, but instead will start next month to get a jump on crime. "
Ahem. Can it possibly be so that a daily newspaper reporter, in this cynical day and age, is so naive the he failed to so much as notice that the jumped up starting date for the gang crimes unit is two days before an election in which gang violence in Ogden has become an issue? That he believes the sole motive for suddenly jumping deployment of the unit ahead to two days before the election was purely to "get a jump on crime," and not to "get a jump on the election?" And I note Mr. Schwebke reported that conclusion about why the deployment date was advanced --- to "get a jump on crime" --- as his own, not Chief Greiner's. If Mr. Schwebke is in fact that credulous, I suggest the Std-Ex News Editor dispatch him to cover the arrival of the Easter Bunny on Ogden lawns next Spring. Maybe he can get an interview.
Then there's the Std-Ex's editorial endorsement of Blain Johnson for a seat on the Council. [I notice the editorial manages not to so much as mention the name of his opponent, Aardema.] What's interesting about the endorsement is that it highlights the way Mr. Johnson is running by claiming to oppose some of Mayor Godfrey's key initiatives over the past four years. Johnson says he's opposed to a city built downtown gondola. He is not, the Std-Ex editorial board concludes from that, a "yes man." Or, he's a Godfrey clone seeking election by pretending not to be. The editorial does note Mr. Johnson made his living as a lawyer for land developers for the most part. That of course does not make him necessarily a poor choice for sitting on the Council, but I would think it might have raised an eyebrow or two when the Mayor Mr. Johnson is supporting for a third term has spent the last four years truckling to large developers, trying to sell the city's parklands to one of them, and using developers' lawyers to draft legislation for the Council's consideration. [Recall the "Ellison Ordinance" from Mr. Peterson's attorney, just by way of example?]
Hmmmmm. Maybe my comments above were unfair to Mr. Schwebke. Maybe he is merely reflecting the credulity of his editors. We shall see.
Then there is the Std-Ex's reporting that Golf course, park to remain free from development --- the same golf course, mind you, that Mr. Blain Johnson's plans for development so impressed the Std-Ex editorial board. The story, by Mr. Schwebke, says that Mayor Matthew Godfrey signed a declaration Thursday to ensure Mount Ogden Golf Course and an adjoining city-owned park remain as open space. The declaration places legally binding covenants and restrictions on the property to prevent it from being developed, Godfrey said.
On this one at least, the fact that there is an election underway seems to have popped up on Mr. Schwebke's reportorial radar, for he adds that Mayor Godfrey is seeking a third term in next month’s general election.
A declaration? I'm more than a little confused about how a mayoral declaration can be legally binding on anything or anyone. Executive proclamations are normally used to declare National Brown Mustard Week or CrossWalk Safety Awareness Week In Ogden. But the story insists the Mayor insists that the declaration involves placing legally binding restrictions on sale or development of the park and surrounding park lands. What are these legally binding restrictions? The story doesn't say. Are they in fact legally binding? The reporter doesn't ask. Come Wednesday morning, the day after the election, will they have any force whatever? Readers aren't told.
This is, sadly, another exercise in press release journalism by the Standard-Examiner... just days before an election. From Ogden's home town paper, during the endgame of an election, we ought to expect better.
© 2005 - 2014 Weber County Forum™ -- All Rights Reserved
31 comments:
Blain Johnson, a now apparent certified soldier in Wayne Peterson's famed Squirrel Patrol, may want to read the Mt. Ogden Community Plan before spouting off about his great "idea" to move the MOGC clubhouse to the top of 36th. He might also want to utilize his pragmatic lawyer's brain and consider the costs of such an absurdity (with demolition, installing non-existent infrastructure, course reconfiguration, and much more), which is roughly $1.8 million. Also, he should not regurgitate Lying Little Matty Gondola Godfrey's lies -- the $300K per year -- and discover that the MOGC loses less than $100K and that is because it's paying sewer fund debt service for Lorin Farr park, the adjoining tennis courts and parking lot, and for its own forgiveable debt, as well as any horses**t miscellaneous fleet expense, including parks equipment that never touches the land up there, Lying Little Matty Gondola Godfrey can dredge up. And, since Squirrel Patroller Johnson teaches economics and marketing courses at WSU, he may want to look up in one of his texbooks how providing a practice facility for a college golf team generates revenue. He might also ask coach of the WSU women's squad, Jeff Smith, why he already has such an arrangement with MOGC and that the facility and city provide him with numerous other means of support. Arrogant j*****s. And finally, he may ask his close associates if his newfound affinity for onions offends them.
THE SKI IS BEAUTIFUL BLUE
Please do not forget that Blain Johnson is also on the board of the Ogden Community Foundation which was recently forced to move its headquarters from Mayor Godfrey's office.
The move was made because of the audit by the Utah State Auditor which found that the Foundation was being run as an extension of Ogden City government.
And Mr. Johnson is the attorney for and part owner of the Jon Peddie group that bought the American Can property from the Ogden Community Foundation in January, 2007.
Talk about a conflict of interest!
One would think that after all the outrage and disharmony caused by lying little matty over trying to give away the parklands that the SE would offer some detail and insght into what he's signed.
Why does the Mayor need a special Gang Crimes Task Force when he touts that he has made Ogden so safe? I am sure that his and Greiner’s numbers don’t support the need for one. I don’t think that Godfrey or Greiner can get around this one question; do you feel safer in Ogden than you did 8 years ago?
I don’t remember any need for special crime task forces to address the “spike” in crime in which so many have been killed or hurt back then….Does anyone?
The lack of attention to Ogden's gang crime problem over the last 8 years is evident in the Mayor's flashy attempt to show that he is trying to make up ground on somehting that he has never cared about before. His desperation highlights his weakness.
I can't say that I am a true believer of Susie, but I know that I am not one of Godfrey. I would rather chose someone with no experience than have the same experiences that we have had over the last 8 years.
I hope that you choose to take the big money movers and land developers out of the equation for the next 4 years. It’s time to put honesty and dignity back into city government.
It's time that you take off the Standard Examiner rose colored Godfrey glasses and look at the truth, the facts and make a moral and ethical choice for Ogden.
Exactly right, som
Johnson is already conflicted in his roles as an OCF Board member AND a Principal AND a lawyer for the Peddie group, he'll be additionally conflicted in his role as an RDA governing board member any time any redevelopment proposal comes up for a vote, especially transactions involving OCF.
Astonishing observation by the Standard-Examiner:
"Rather, he [Johnson] presents himself as the type of individual who’ll spot the pitfalls before taking the wrong step."
Johnson obviously wouldn't recognize a conflict of interest if he were up to eyeballs in it -- which he is.
Same Old Malarky:
Nice catch on all points. I wonder if the SE Editorial Board asked him about potential conflicts between his role as an attorney for those involved in City backed development projects and his role as a Councilman voting on matters key to such projects? I wonder if they asked him about views about the secret meetings of a public body [according to the state auditor] in the Mayor's office, and his views on open government and full disclosure as matters of principle?
So one election issue, then, vis a vis the Aardema/Johnson race seems to be this: If you think Ogden city government should be run by lawyers in the pay of major developers seeking city land and properties for their own profit, Johnson is your clear choice. If you think Ogden city government should not be run by lawyers in the pay of major developers, then Aardema is your clear choice.
Odd, isn't it, that the SE endorsement editorial didn't mention Mr. Johnson's connection to the developers of the American Can project, the fact that he works for them? Imagine that.
There is an interesting article in the Salt Lake Tribune this morning about proposed legislation that would prohibit state government entities (city, county and state) from going into business in competition against private enterprise.
You can see it here:
Measure would protect private sector interests
Of particular interest was the following:
"It seems to me the state government should exercise its authority in whatever way it can to ensure the rights and liberties of people," said Stephenson, the head of the Utah Taxpayers Association, which supports the bill.
He believes the state's proper role includes making sure "local governments aren't getting into the business of business and putting private concerns that have invested their capital out of business," said Stephenson.
Stephenson, who chairs the Government Competition and Privatization Subcommittee, said lawmakers keep hearing from business owners who say their survival is being threatened by competition from government-owned entities, and said that is the path the former Soviet Union took and it paid a price. He also noted that government has a built-in advantage because it is exempt from taxes that businesses must pay."
Unsaid in the article is that Ogden under Godfrey is the worst offender
in state history.
Ozboy-
Although Godfrey has claimed to rely on the free market on many occasions, he has indeed been a horrendous offender as you rightly point out. However, I think this proposed legislation is also a bit extreme. Where Stephenson is from in Draper, it might not be an issue as it is a relatively wealthy community that has had private developers and businesses flocking to the area for years. But in older communities like Ogden that have been depressed and have seen an out migration of money and business over the past several decades, it really ties up their hands. I am a bit torn on this as I know Godfrey has abused the system and has misused public money in favor of his crony friends and to further his at time wacky ideas, but this piece of State legislation does not appear to be the correct answer.
RE: Proposed Crime Reduction/anti-gang Program
Unbelievable, residents who live in this area of Ogden (a HUGE area-nearly 100 blocks) have been clamoring for years for more and better public safety measures. Now, days before the election, something is actually being done. This pisses me off! Tokenism! What comedy, hopefully my neighbors will see this for what it is--an election time ploy--and vote Hizzonah outta office. We need a change!
Curm,
the SE editorial board asks the same questions to each council candidate. At least that has been the case in all 4 of the interviews they've posted so far on their website. Ozboy, did you skip the first sentence in the article you linked? Godfrey was doing exactly what these folks wanted - trying to turn our city owned golf course over to private hands so it wouldn't compete with all the private courses in the area. This article was not about government subsidizing private business - Fat Cats and Gold's Gym, for example - but government running businesses like golf courses and competing against private courses that aren't tax exempt. Godfrey has the same mentality as these folks. Which is why he said in one of his "sell the golf course and build a gondola" shows that if he could sell the fire department to a private entity he'd do it.
TK:
You wrote: "The SE editorial board asks the same questions to each council candidate."
I knew that. Or should have. Thanks. But it does illustrate, then, another weakness of the SE interview process. I'm sure they'd defend their procedure of asking the same questions of all the candidates as a guarantee of fairness. What it means, however, is that they cannot ask a candidate any questions drawing specifically on his or her qualifications or past performance.
Presumably, [just to take an extreme case by way of example], if a candidate for the Council made it into the primary, and it was subsequently revealed that he'd pled guilty to say bribing public officials in his former city, the SE Board would not be able to query him about that, or ask how that might affect his performance, or his credibility, on the Council, because they weren't going to be able to ask the other candidate those same questions.
A far better approach, if the goal is to have the Board make sound recommendations, would be for the Board, behind closed doors, to ask whatever questions it deemed appropriate and most pointed of each candidate who came before it. This "one size fits all" approach to editorial board interviewing is a bad idea... particularly since each candidate knows he or she is being taped and is, in fact, speaking directly to the electorate. Boilerplate questions get boilerplate answers.
The idea of resuming endorsements was a good one. The painfully restrictive and with the cameras rolling "one size fits all" format they've devised is a poor one, and not well-designed to provide the board with the kind of information it needs to make a sound decision. It is especially poorly designed when they're interviewing challengers and incumbents. They ought to be able to ask the incumbent probing specific questions about his or her actions in office [clearly they cannot ask the same questions of challengers], and challengers probing questions about their experience [or lack thereof] and how it might bear on their performance in office. Can't do that with once set of boiler-plate questions for both.
They're newspaper men and women, for God's sake... or they're supposed to be. Not TV producers. The interviews should be designed to provide print journalists with the information they need, and the opportunity to ask questions and to poke and probe where ever they think wise, and not to provide a web-site with video fill. How the hell can print journalists tie their own hands and be forced into a position where they have to say "we'd really like to ask what the hell you were thinking of when you did X, but we didn't ask your opponent --- who didn't do X --- that question so we can't ask you."
Newspaper people? Print guys? Editors, for gawd's sake, tying their own hands like that? Jesus....
"They're newspaper men and women, for God's sake... or they're supposed to be. Not TV producers."
Wrong, perfessor!
We thought their well thought out array of uniform questions was VERY good.
We salute the Standard-Examiner editors for what they're trying to do... which is to move the old-style print medium into the wired information age.
They're trying REAL HARD... although they don't quite get it yet.
Now if they'd just get over the paranoid idea that BLOGGERS are threat to them, rather than a symbiotic resource, as Elder McConkie suggested...
We'll have REAL fine journalism in the 21st century.
heheheh...
Rudi:
To have a set of "well thought out... uniform questions" to ask both candidates is fine. To permit only that set of uniform questions, however well-thought out, is not.
By asking the same set of questions, the Std-Ex editors created a level playing field.
Once again we disagree. Imagine that...
BTW, we've linked all the Std-Ex candidate question-answer sessions to out archive site, where they are available for our readers' viewing here.
Check back for updates.
Has anyone else received an envelope containing a CD in the mail today?
There is nothing on the outside to indicate its source, however inside is over an hour of propaganda for Godfrey, probably produced by Rupert. In addition to citizen and Godfrey interviews, it also contains the WSU debate, supposedly with additional info from Matt. I admit I fast-forwarded through that part.
Was the debate videotaped by a City employee using City equipment on City time? Watching Matt look earnest while telling incredible whoppers was a lesson in psychopathology.
I suspect that most people will deep-six it without opening, correctly assuming it's the junk mail it is.
Ogdenlover:
It's my understanding that the WSU debate was taped by someone from Pinnacle Marketing. I suspect they're the source of what's on the disk you received. Unless it came from the Channel 17 tape.
The S-E just posted the Gochnour and Petersen videos.
Oh my stars!
At 6:52, Petersen says, "I'm concerned about the rising crime rate."
He must not have gotten the memo. Crime is down 21% (or 23%, it varies). Violent crime is down 43%.
Someone needs to write a strongly-worded editorial telling him he's full of beans.
Ogdenlover:
As an Evil Scientist, I think you should do an experiment.
You need to see if the Mayor went to the extra expense and trouble of making the CD impervious to microwave radiation.
Send the blog a video of the results.
Ogdenlover,
Did Susie sign any kind of waiver that would allow the debate to be used in this fashion? I thought she signed a waiver for Weber State to use the video - but this seems to overstep some boundaries! Especially if the content has been edited or additional crap is being added.
Any Mt Ogden community residents out there, since the council races don't get much press coverage, be sure to take 30 minutes and watch both the Petersen and Gochnour interviews by the SE. My opinion is that Gochnour would make a far better council person for our neighborhood. It's clear from what she says in her interview that she's walked this neighborhood extensively and has done lots of research on the issues facing the city.
waiver?
you might want to examine the laws in a manner such as this.
no waiver needed.
I feel like I've been out to dinner and had a lousy meal. If I wanted a mediocre meal I'd just stay home!
Yesterday the SE gave us all a gift by endorsing Amy.
Now, that they've done their token duty, they just endorsed Johnson who brings so much baggage.
I agree with you, Curm, that this set of questions did not give the SE the opportunity to delve into this guy's many alliances.
They should have asked hard questions. Apparently they took direction from Schwebke and just didn't know how to ask queastions, and then the follow-questions. No digging. No curiosity. No value to the voters.
Shame on the SE. Sure, having the same questions, as Rudi likes, levels the playing field, but it leaves concerned voters out in left field.
A poor attempt by the SE....I'm dissatisfied. Still hungry for something more and better.
Mmmmhmmm....we still have no guarantees from the electioneering gadfly that the park and open spaces will be protected.
Schwebke is a dolt. Is he naturally insipid, or have his editors used the cattle nippers on him and rendered him impotent?
Well Curm,
As for Godfrey selling the fire department ..I wouldn’t put it past him. He could privatize the department and the Ambulance and Paramedic service. Don’t think that the little lying prick hasn’t thought of that,
I am sure that if he gets re-elected he will have some great retaliation against the firefighters for backing his opposition again (for the third time).
Last time he eliminated three firefighter’s positions at station 4 in west Ogden (Jesse Garcia's District) Hmmmm? What do you think?
Sharon:
You wrote: I agree with you, Curm, that this set of questions did not give the SE the opportunity to delve into this guy's many alliances.
Agreeing with me is, of course, always wise practice. But I'd add that I'd have wanted them to be just as aggressive, just as probing in their questions of Aardema. And I'd expect, depending on where the conversation went, the questions for one, other than a starter question or two, to have been different.
That's the key to my disagreement with Rudi... and the SE... about the format they used: the word conversation. If they wanted to find out about a candidate's views and much more, the way to do it is to engage the candidate in a conversation about issues, ideas, plans, beliefs and [for incumbents] his or her record. A conversation. Not a set piece Q and A dog and pony show. That's what the best editorial interviews turn into: conversations between the candidates and the editors. And that's what the SE staff passed on in favor of a taped Q and A session. Big missed opportunity. For them. For Ogden.
Mercy:
I don't think Mr. Schwebke is a dolt, as you put it. What I don't understand is his lack of curiosity, his apparent unwillingness to ask obvious follow-up question, his unwillingness to probe at all, and his being satisfied with reporting lightly warmed over press releases period. The story on the Mayor's "declaration" of "legally binding restrictive covenants" is a prime example. At the end of that story, readers did not know what those covenants were, or what they said. Not a clue. Mr. Schwebke called Ms. Van Hooser for a reaction... to a document she hadn't seen, and got the only possible answer from her: she couldn't comment yet, not having seen the mayor's "declaration" or what came with it.
I know the SE has lawyers, because the paper occasionally gets sued, and it occasionally sues the Ogden City Government to cough up public documents the City doesn't want to cough up. Cannot understand, even now, why the story didn't include a description of what these alleged "restrictive covenants" said or did, and a call to the paper's attorneys --- or a municipal law expert say at U of U law school --- for an opinion on whether a Mayor in Utah can, by simple declaration, create legally binding restrictive covenants regarding public land sales. I have no idea. The point is, after reading the SE article, I should have an idea, because the SE should have told me. It didn't.
It is possible, and to be fair we ought at least to consider, that Mr.Schwebke's failure often to probe, to ask questions, especially of elected officials, to check claims that are easily checkable, is in fact the kind of reporting his editors have directed him to do.
But how the editors could be happy with a story about newly "declared" restrictions on sale and development of the parklands which does not say what those restrictions are or how they will be enforced escapes me.
Ogden --- all of Weber County --- all of Northern Utah --- deserves better from its only daily paper.
I watched the Gochnour vs. Peterson tapes. Thanks to the SE for this.
Gochnour is better than Peterson. But still, she thinks tax incentives are a good idea.
This is simple, but nobody gets it. In the long run, tax incentives raise taxes and make things worse. Even though this can been seen EVERYWHERE ACROSS THE COUNTRY, it will take some educating the council on this.
At least if the women win, the council will listen. The men never will.
BTW Amy Wicks seems to get it. So does Dorrene. Caitlin will listen.
Do you people really feel threatened? And I ask this honestly, I often walk right through the center of the inner-city and I work downtown.
Perhaps I'm just as naive as you are paranoid.
Most of the times the fear is in your head and not based in reality.....but look out for the terrorist next door!
From the AP newswire:
WASHINGTON (AP) — The White House scolded the Federal Emergency Management Agency on Friday for staging a phony news conference about assistance to victims of wildfires in southern California.
The agency... arranged to have FEMA employees play the part of independent reporters Tuesday and ask questions of Vice Adm. Harvey E. Johnson, the agency's deputy director.
The questions were predictably soft and gratuitous.
"I'm very happy with FEMA's response," Johnson said in reply to one query from an agency employee.
Ah, to have the press asking questions so probing and substantive that government officials feel the need to stage phony press conferences with their own employees pretending to be reporters so the questions will all be mushballs.
No need for that in Ogden, of course....
Just noticed the Standard id recommending Kent the big dumb baffoon Petersen for council, tsk tsk tsk.
Looks like another murder tonight, the only city where the crime rate seems to go down with each dead body. A block away, on Madison, another body covered up, laying under a tree. Hey little man in office.....you're a liar!
Post a Comment