RDA Bails on the Emerald City Union Square Project

Council Director Bill Cook suggests a $.63 million loss is "good news"
Emerald city citizens plead for somebody in local government to behave honestly

By Curmudgeon

Interesting article in this morning's Standard-Examiner. The Ogden RDA [aka City Council] last night sold the city's remaining interest in the Union Square townhouse development for a million dollars to a group intending now to complete the second phase of the town home development. According to the story, the City had fronted the original project about one and a quarter million dollars [not counting a $650 K tax increment bond].

What I found most interesting in the story was this comment by Bill Cook, Clerk of the Council and RDA Administrator: The sale of the RDA's interest in the second phase of Union Square is beneficial because it will recover most of its original investment, Cook said. "It's great news."

What's interesting is this: back when the first phase of the project went belly up, the Mayor kept pointing to the project as a sign of his business prowess and sound business judgment [most people do not point to investments that go belly up as signs of their business acumen but Godfrey did]. Others, myself among them, suggested that the failed original development indicated instead a lack of sound business judgment on the Mayor's part. At which point, in several discussions, the Mayor insisted that once new investors took over, the city had "not lost a dime" on its investment.

Mr. Cook's statement this morning suggests that the Mayor's claim back then was not accurate. Note Mr. Cook says the city has now recouped "most" of its original investment. [We seem to be out about a quarter of a million in public funds, in the end.]

Now, it's good the city got a million back. It's good the new investors intend to complete the project [timed to coincide with the arrival of Frontrunner]. I hope the new project is sold out before completion. That would be very good news for downtown and for Ogden. What interests me about Mr. Cook's statement is that it cannot be true if the mayor's claim [we didn't lose a dime] is true, and if Mr. Cook's statement is true, the mayor's claim cannot be. Or am I missing something?

I think Mr. Cook has the numbers on his side in this, at least based on what the Std-Ex story says. But I have to ask, as so many have asked so many times before, why is it this administration can not speak openly, plainly and honestly about its decisions? Why is it constantly being revealed that this statement, that assertion, the other claim was not, in fact, accurate or complete? Why the endless dissembling?

And it is, usually, all so damn unnecessary. The City uses its development funds much like a venture capitalist does his funds. It makes what it considers prudent investments in development that will pay off in the long run for the city and the taxpayers. Because it is spending public money, it has to be more cautious, more conservative in making such investments than an ordinary venture capitalist would be [who is putting at risk only his own and his partners' money]. Nevertheless, we cannot reasonably expect every city development investment to pay off, to work out exactly as anticipated. Nobody bats a thousand.

An honest statement by the Mayor at the time the original project went under, that it had seemed like a prudent investment for the city,and the Council had agreed, but that it hadn't worked out, that he hoped still to retrieve a major portion of the city's investment from the new owners, but that it was not all going to work out as he and the Council had hoped, would have served him, and the city, better than the usual political "it's not my fault; we didn't really lose anything; you're all naysayers" spin we got instead.

Dear Mayor Godfrey: speak honestly. Speak plainly. Don't dissemble. Even when you or your administration screws up. Build a reputation for your word being good, even if on occasion it turns out your judgment has not been. Nobody bats a thousand. Openness and honesty would serve your city... and you... a lot better in the long term than the endless dissembling you are in the habit of serving up instead.