Roman-style emperor of Ogden slugs it out with the mayoral candidate of the people
We're establishing this thread for discussion of tonight's debate. Lodge your pre-debate comments and predictions here. Post-debate comments and observations are strongly encouraged. Article-length reports will be uploaded to our storage site and linked to the front page. May the best woman win.
Don't let the cat get your tongues.
Update 10/25/07 6:32 a.m. MT: Be sure to check out this morning's Standard-Examiner story, in which Scott Schwebke summarizes last night's debate.
15 comments:
Hi everyone, I guess I'll be the first to comment on tonights debate! Since it ended just about two hours ago - I'm suprised that no one has posted yet. Overall I think Susie did really great!
There were some particularly loaded questions, obviously crafted by the chamber specifically to highlight some of Susie's weaknesses. I found it interesting that the Standard Examiner actually had a copy of the questions earlier in the day. Despite the fact that they were not supposed to be given to the candidates prior to the debate - I'm sure that someone in Godfrey's camp managed to get their hands on a copy.
Susie did get some excellent digs in about the gondola though! And she really came out swinging in the end!
Of course Godfrey was at his best (lying that is). He actually tried to produce a document claiming that the city is not responsible for RDA debt. He also told a few other whoppers about the city always following all of the state regulations when it comes to city land sales!
Well, goodnight everyone!
Urbanite:
Thank you for the report from the front.
I thot Susie acquitted herself very well.
She looked confident and followed the rules! Godfrey continually minced about asking "can I use her time?"...."I need more time...".
The questions were redundant...Hardman told us that only the Chamber had the questions.
Why the secrecy?
However, at a little after-debate party for Susie, she said she was called by Schwebke.
He asked if she'd seen the questions. "NO!" He had seen them yesterday! Really? He wouldn't reveal his 'source'. Now isn't it standard practice at the Standard that every word has to be verified????
Hardman made a big point of the questions being under wraps, yet he said he'd emailed them to the League of Women Voters, and they "inadvertently" ended up in some places they shouldn't have. Hmmm. Wasn't Susie castigated, and in the paper yet, for some emails 'inadvertenly going to the wrong place?
Again, why the secrecy? Thirteen questions. Most dealing over and over with "economic development". At times the audience was restless listening to the same questions posed in another way.
The debate ended at 9..so there was no time for quetions from the audience.
There were two points that I wish Susie had expouneded on. One was a question of building on 'slopes'. That was the perfect opportunity for her to remind one and all that Peterson and Godfrey were trying to have zoning changed so that Peterson could build his 400 homes on Mt Ogden land and UP the slope!
The other opportunity was when Godfrey so glibly told us that ALL public land is advertised and open to the public for bid. He also said the lands have all been sold for "fair market value".
Again, Susie could and should have reminded the audience of BootJack and the Peterson boys. That the Council was not apprised of just who BootJack is...and that Tom Owens had offered $30,000. more than Peterson paid. Godfrey also said that the purpose for the properties is known. Uh uh....Susie should and could have told how Neil Hansen was told "in private", after the dog and pony show at Union Station that the "land (Mt Ogden) goes to the person with the 'smartest ' plan".
Other than those two important issues that show how Matt lies and practices cronyism, I think Susie did well.
We wern't allowed to applaud until the very end.d The Godfreyites stood and cheered. Susie rec'd a lot of applause too , but we remained seated.
I hope the 4 women will now have a Conversation with the Women Candidates. Voters need to get to know the 3 women running for Council in an informal setting.
I'm interested to know what the other attendees thot.
It is not proper that the Chamber had such apparent input on the questions. In fact, it seemed to me that Godfrey may have written most of them himself! So many were self-serving.
Susie managed to get in a few digs on Matt. One was that he hadn't been to a work meeting (nor a council meeting) for weeks, and he instructed his administration to not attend either. Godfrey was upset by her remarks and said that wasn't true, and in effect called her a liar. (Shades of Ed Allen. He likes to get in your face and snarl, "you calling me a liar?")
Susie leaned into her mike and said to Godfrey..."I have the email"...that he sent to his A Team. He told her that wasn't true. Then he backtracked and blamed his staff for any oversights, and they weren't intentional IF they happened. He NEVER takes the blame for anything wrong, but his 'people' are at fault.
Oh, Godfrey says the only crime stats that are true are from the CITY! The State changes them, and the FBI changes them! That curious lie just laid there because no one from the audience was allowed to challenge, and Susie had no more time to rebut.
Thanks, Sharon.
KUTV has the news segment clip up on their website
If it ends with a question mark, lying little matty just can't help himself, he automatically lies.
This time the SE owes it to everyone to dig far enough and expose the fact that he is lying.
No more stupid he said she said. This may just blow carters endorsement out the window.
Just get rid of the Police Departant and the Fire Department, because Mayor Godfrey is such a hereo. He can catch the bike thieves and put out the kitchen fire, because he is for "LESS GOVERNMENT."
It would seem that Susie has nailed Mayor "I will do and say anything to get re-elected" Godfrey in another lie. This is from her web site:
October 24
I hope you've noticed all the interesting mail you've been receiving lately.
First, if you're a homeowner, you just got your annual property tax bill. Ouch!
Second, you may have received a campaign postcard from Mayor Godfrey, explaining that the increase in your property tax isn't his fault. The city's share of your property tax is actually 5% lower than it could have been. Chances are that your property assessment has risen much faster than the tax rate has gone down, so you're still paying more than you were.
The mayor even offers to help, and asks you to call him if you think your property's assessment is too high. His phone number isn't printed on the card, but here it is: 629-8111. If you call, you might ask him why he's offering to help now, after it's too late to challenge your assessment. He could have easily put this offer into your utility bill insert a month or two ago, in time to really help.
Which brings me to the third item of interest: your Ogden City utility bill. Have you noticed how much that has gone up over the last eight years? Mine has risen more than 50%, or about 20% after inflation--far more than the nominal 5% decrease in property tax. The average Ogden homeowner pays more to the city in utility fees than in property taxes. And another large utility rate increase is looming on the horizon.
So it's important to look at the big picture. Your utility rates have risen sharply over the last few years. The city's share of your property tax has probably risen as well, but not as fast as it could have. The total amount that you now pay to the city is more than it used to be, not less.
Yes, Van Hooser did well last night. Naturally, I wish she had done even better.
The questions were indeed stacked to favor the mayor, giving him multiple opportunities to brag about the details of what he's accomplished, and to take credit for what others have accomplished.
The other thing I've noticed, watching these debates and other public events, is that Godfrey really enjoys arguing and Van Hooser doesn't. He's just naturally competitive and aggressive. He spins everything he says. You can tell he's been honing his debate skills for a long time. Van Hooser gets nervous in debates, and becomes much less articulate than she is in less adversarial settings. I wish Channel 17 would show the Tuesday night forum (which wasn't so adversarial), or show Van Hooser having an ordinary conversation with someone.
I suppose the mayor's supporters would claim that his debate skills are useful not only during the campaign but also on the job. Perhaps, very rarely, this is true. But as I think back over the many dozens of political meetings I've attended over the last few years, it's clear that much more gets accomplished when people don't come in with an adversarial attitude. To get things done you need to be able to listen and learn, not just argue. There's no question in my mind that Van Hooser's collaborative skills will make her a more effective mayor than Godfrey.
yea... i don't know which debate you all were watching, but "susie" did NOT represent herself or her cause well.
but, you know, it's nice to see that people with open minds come here to really talk about the debate.
wow.
are you kidding me . . .
Maybe you should open your mind to the FACTS! It doesn't matter how articulate someone is, or even how charming they appear to be if everything that is coming out of there mouth is a half-truth, and in many instances a full-on-lie.
It's taken me four years to wake up and realize that Godfrey is not a leader - he is a salesman! And guess what, this used car of lies he's peddling is a lemon!
Of course if you're new to the Ogden political scene I can hardly blame you for thinking what your thinking right now - considering I've been there myself. But please, take the time to research the facts and find out for yourself what exactly has been going on in Ogden.
Dan S.
Interesting perspective, and I guess many see what they want to see, but if you ask me Van Hooser is actually much more negative and adversarial. Especially when answering a question she is not informed about. She will skirt this question by attacking, yet offering no solution of her own.
It is interesting to talk to people that were there and they say she was horrible then come on this board and her she did very well. Everyone is drinking kool-aid!
I was at Tuesday's debate and thought she was much better than the WSU event, but still found her negative and less informed than I would want.
I didn't attend last nights event and can't comment on that.
Just grabbing my checkbook to look at the city utility payments from the past year ... Since last December, my payments have ranged from $36-40. When we bought our house in spring of 2000, I don't think the costs were significantly less - maybe $10 less per month? I don't find that a huge, unwieldy increase over a seven-year period.
Also during that time, the city began its recycling program and bought all the blue cans and the trucks that can pick up trash/recyclables at the same time. Yep, that's going to cost more in utility payments, but I was happy to see the recycling program here instead of paying a little company from Logan to come down and pick up my bottles and cans every other week.
Then again, I own a very small house and try to be conservative with my water usage. I'm sure folks with bigger houses and bigger families have seen bigger increases ... but it seems to me an odd point to try to fault the administration on.
The point about a marked lack of manufacturing operations for these so-called ski companies being located in OTown is valid, which is why I think they're rinky-dink and largely insignificant when discussing the city's larger economic picture. All the dozen total admin jobs they moved to Ogden were occupied. With the exception of Amer -- run by Gondola Boy Mike Dowse, jackass!, who turned his "thank the community" event into a Lying Little Matty Gondola Godfrey and onion campaign rally -- these "ski companies" have generated net four warehousing jobs, but have contributed greatly to community discord with their THE GONDOLA cheerleading and Lying Little Matty Gondola Godfrey supporting. And this: Goodie, Goodie, Goodie, Goodie!
THE SKI IS BEAUTIFUL BLUE
I agree with you Jason. With the exception of Amer (a good thing I think), all the rest of these ski companies, including Descente, do not contribute as much to Ogden city's tax coffers as the average corner "C" store does. Scott is excepted also, but they were already here and simply moved inside the city boundaries. The rest of them are fine, but their importance to Ogden is wildly exaggerated by the midget and his amen choir.
I think the mayor should hold back some of his campaign money rahter than spend it on his doomed efforts.
I think he'll need the seed capital.
Post a Comment