The rush is on; oh waitaminute, now it's not
By Monotreme
Today's Standard-Examiner brings news that Ernest Health is delaying their purchase of Ogden River Project property.
The story is sourced, of course, to Emerald City Economic Development Department Director Dave Harmer, one of three people that Scott Schwebke has on his speed-dial.
Ernest Health claims to know nothing of it, and the incurious Mr. Schwebke merely repeats what Harmer has told him, without any independent source or confirmation of the information.
But the story is not completely useless! It gives Mr. Harmer, through his mouthpiece Mr. Schwebke, the opportunity to repeat the now-tired meme that a previous City Council "aggressively questioned" Ernest Health officials. I guess "due diligence" has little meaning for this administration.
The other thing that caught my eye was that the purchase of the property has now been discussed for two years, and the clock is still running.
Our blogmaster, or somebody else, may be able to pull from the archives a quote from Mr. Harmer that the deal has to be done immediately, and that the council (meeting as the RDA board) should not bother to thoroughly review the proposal. I don't have a specific recollection of Mr. Harmer's "IT HAS TO BE DONE TODAY" speech for the Ernest Health deal, but I bet someone can find it, because each and every proposal he's brought before the RDA board has a ticking clock attached to it.
© 2005 - 2014 Weber County Forum™ -- All Rights Reserved
23 comments:
Mono:
I believe that's the same Mr. Harmer who insisted the council must approve sale of the Shupe Williams property at once to a tile company that, it turned out, didn't want to buy it. And was it Mr. Harmer or Mr. Patterson who insisted to the Council that it approve buying St. Anne's and assisting in moving it to to 12th Street because the St. Anne's Board liked the idea, when it turned out the Board didn't? Facts are often such tacky inconvenient things. It's much easier to get what you want if you ignore them and urge the rubes you are pitching that they have to act immediately and that there is no time to look into things more thoroughly.
Ever had some salesman for Sears or some other home repair company give you an estimate and then insist, right there in your living room, that the price just quoted is good only if you sign immediately, and that he cannot guarantee it will be available tomorrow.... A dishonorable way to do business, of course, but what we've come to expect from what laughingly calls itself "American business leadership" these days. But we should hope, at least, that our elected city government would conduct its business by higher ethical standards.
No, damnit, we should not merely hope that. We should expect and demand it. If I were on the Council, the instant any Godfrey administration flack told me something had to be voted on immediately, I'd refuse to act on the matter for 7 days from that point on to allow some research and fact-checking. Arbitrary? Based on the administration's past performance, I don't think so. It would not be arbitrary. It would be prudent.
I wonder if Gadi Leshem is quietly trying to get the city to back out of the Ernest deal. A rehab hospital doesn't seem like a good fit for his Renaissance Village project, it seems to me.
Never was a good fit, and very curious why Harmer, Godfrey and Brockette wanted it to be so.
DO it NOW is the MO of this administration...why quit now?
Kudos to Neil Hansen. I'm so proud of him! Of course we know quotas exist. Didn't we witness the denigration and then firing of a fine police officer who railed against the practice?
Greiner and his fellow cheifs are too darned disengenuous to tell teh truth. The public knows the score, tho, Some of us have kept the "Justice" Court afloat by paying bogus tickets. (Still wish my husb had insisted on jail time instead of paying the 'reduced' price ticket!
How many of you got the questionaire in the mail from Senator John (Police Chief who needs to go on a diet and weight loss program) Greiner?
It says paid for by the Republican Party.
Does this means he represents only Republicans?
My Democrat husband did not get one.
I don't think I will bother filling it out since he hasn't paid any attention to comments in the past.
Don't tell me he is shooting to run for a higher office...Egads!
Mrs. Brown-
Please do not attempt to divert the heat off Mr. Harmer by putting it on Senator Greiner.
Harmer is one of our Ogden City RDA experts who keeps stating to any and all that we dumb citizens are not responsible for RDA debt.
No wonder Harmer is no longer in the corporate world of business.
Well Mono, nobody I know of has ever ever ever accused Schwepke of being a competent reporter. Not even the Standard itself brags about him. So what do you expect from such a schlub, decent reporting?
Lionel and Mono:
The piling on on Mr. Schwebke on this story seems to me unwarranted. First, whether people like it or not, Mr. Harmer is a city employee and certified spokesman for the Godfrey administration. When he makes an announcement in that capacity it is news and the SE should report what Mr. Harmer says. Which Mr. Schwebke did.
Second, it seems clear that Mr. Schwebke did not simply go with Mr. Harmer's press release. As Mono himself notes, the story reports that "Ernest Health claims to know nothing of it." Mr. Schwebke clearly contacted the company, and got the Vice President of Marketing and Business Development there there to go on the record saying that he was unaware of any change in plans. And Schwebke reported that in his story.
Finally, for what it's worth, the SE gave Mr. Schwebke an award for his reporting last year, I believe. Folks might not agree that the award was merited, but it is flatly not true, on the evidence, that the SE does not think Mr. Schwebke is doing good work.
Once again: thump him when you think he falls short and explain why. I have in the past and expect I will again down the road. But knee-jerk criticism of any Schwebke story, simply because it is a Schwebke story... and I think some of that is going on here... is unjustified and out of line. In today's story, he did not simply take Mr. Harmer's statement at face value, but contacted the company to check Harmer's claims, and found a company exec who could not and did not back up Harmer's version. I call that reporting, not "press release journalism."
Curm, Schwebke ought to buy you lunch for unwaivering defense of his many slips. Did I ever tell you that he once asked me at a City Council meeting if I was Curmudgeon? I chuckled and said no.
In fairness to Schwebke, the real incompetence regarding the hows and whats, reporting our local news rests with Andy Howell. He's responsible to see that the followup questions and other sourses have transpired. He every so often offers slight appologies for content, but not much.
Curm
Evidently your vacation didn't get rid of all the anal tendencies that that cloud some of your posts.
In the same article Schwepke also once again refers to the "aggressively questioned" of Ernest Health officials by the RDA board in the past. A complete fiction he continues to foist upon the Standard readers. Is that good honest reporting in your book, or is it lazy incompetent reporting? And I wouldn't exactly call a phone call to, and simple statement from, an Ernest flack as investigative reporting. There was nothing else in his article that would indicate he did anything more than he usually does - print as fact what the Godfrey machine feeds him without any verification of the truth of the matter.
The guy is a hack no matter which way you slice it, and no matter how hard you try you can't polish a turd.
Frank and Bill:
You wrote: And I wouldn't exactly call a phone call to, and simple statement from, an Ernest flack as investigative reporting.
I didn't claim it was investigative reporting. Investigative reporting is a very different thing than straight news reporting. The story we're discussing was straight news. It has to meet the standards for that, not what we'd apply to a Sy Hersh piece unraveling Bush administration incompetence. Different kind of reporting, different kinds of stories, different standards. It was good news reporting. He checked what Harmer with the company, found a discrepancy and reported it. As he should have.
As for "aggressively" questioning: while I wouldn't have used that term, it is not necessarily inaccurate. As a matter of fact, I'd prefer the Council to question those hoping to do business with the city vigorously [the term I'd have used]. And please note that aggressive questioning by elected public bodies is not necessarily either impolite or inappropriate. I think we need a hell of a lot more of it than we're getting. But that's just my opinion.
Today's story simply recounted the paper's reports published at the time, and in the same terms. Seems like a lot of heart-burning over his using "aggressive" instead of, say, "vigorous" --- which I would have used. Hardly grounds for the kind of vituperative attacks above.
Bill, as for my alleged "unwaivering defense of his many slips," you surely haven't forgotten the numerous times I've taken the SE, Mr. Schwebke and the editors of the SE to task, here, for what I thought was poor work, work absolutely unacceptable in my hometown paper. Surely you remember that when Mr. Schwebke asked you if you were Curmudgeon, it was because [you told me] he was not happy with something I had written about his reporting. "Unending defense of his many slips"? Nonsense.
Whup the SE and its reporters upside the head when they drop the ball. But today's story was not badly done, it was not press release journalism, and his repeating "aggressive" to describe the council's vigorous questioning of Ernest's officials at the time does not, seems to me, justify today's assault. Way way over the top.
Besides, I'm not sure the Ernest execs the Council questioned --- vigorously, aggressively, take your pick --- could have told them much anyway. We now know, for example that [if Harmer is to be believed --- always a dicey proposition], the Godfrey administration knows more about Ernest Company operations than its own vice-presidents do. And we know that thanks to Mr. Schwebke's reporting today in the SE.
PS to Frank: I wish I'd been on a vacation trip. I wasn't.
Curm, was out feeding animals and breaking ice. I wasn't so upset with todays piece as much as becoming generally fed up with the SE in general. I too understand that it's nice to have a local paper, but these guys are fast giving me the impression their nothing more than an ad merchant with a little window dressing.
In fact I saw a show on PBS the other night that said what's going on here is a national trend, a byproduct of media conglomeration.
These Sanduski guys have ruined quite a few what used to be local papers, and their not alone.
Pretty soon it's not inconcievable that the Australian Rupert Murdock might own and control every source of news available to us.
Just to change the subject, I found J. Spencer's comment, above, really interesting:
"J. Spencer said...
I wonder if Gadi Leshem is quietly trying to get the city to back out of the Ernest deal. A rehab hospital doesn't seem like a good fit for his Renaissance Village project, it seems to me."
There are so many excellent investigative journalist on this blog, the above is a good point to research. Why would Gadi Lesham want the Ernest Health rehab hospital in the middle of more profitable mixed use housing and retail, along the Ogden River. Whether Team Lesham calls it Ogden Renaissance Village, or whatever, their project seems like a much better use of the whole property along the Ogden River, from Washington to Wall. I am sure Ogden City can find a differnet piece of its property to sell Ernst Health. True, we have not seen any renderings of Ogden Renaissance Village. Once those are presented, I am sure any number of people here will voice their opinions.
Next question. Why does this crew think that Jeff Lowe's Ice Tower is such a bad idea. Jeff Lowe at least is a well respected climber. And climbing, in all 4 seasons, is a big deal around here. I was not impressed with the arichtect's rendereing of the outside of that tower, published in the SE in the last few weeks. That design struck me as a little too Neo Nazi for me. I think SLC, and the surrounding areas, has the corner on that type of regressive architecture. Ogden should step out and up to the plate. And ask for something better, design wise. But that was just the first drawing. Funds are still being raised for that project. The architect is, most likely, still working on the design.
What Jeff lowe is putting together, around his background as an aplinist, is at least a real sport that relates to this area. As opposed to one more kiddie wadding pool. TJ, you are the CA surfer. Do you really want one more flowrider in town?
Here we are in a desert. Some people are talking about diverting the Bear River to make more dams and reservoirs, and Ogden needs one more lagoon, downtown!?!. That only gives some of the poorer architects around here the chance to design one more building in the style of what SLC has too much of. For lack of a better term, I will call it Derivative Debbie Does Disney. But I am sure some of you word smiths can outdo me.
I bet Jeff Lowe's Ice tower will take less water than one more water park in this desert. Why is the building agenda in some parts of downtown Ogden to try to outdo Reno andn Las Vegas and ALL WALT'S WORLDS. Do you really want all "those tacky people" coming to downtown Ogden.
I say YES to more kayak parks, and river walkways, parks and open space. And YES to Jeff Lowe's climbing tower. Which I am sure will have a bookstore, set up like a national parks info center, where climbing enthusiasts can buy and browse climbing DVD's, books, maps of local cimbing areas, etc., while waiting their turn.
But one more piddling pool is not better than suggesting the Billagio come to Ogden. When you read the comments from all the ski industry reps who came into to town for AmerSports Winter Summit, they all talked about the kind of fantastic snow they got to ski on at SnowBasin. Yeah, they wondered if a 4 season resort would be built at Malan's Basin, with a gondola up to it. But NONE OF THEM mentioned spending ANY time at the Salomon Center, on the flowrider or the climbing wall.
Bill:
On Murdoch taking over the SE.... hmmm. Do you think he'd be able to do a Page 3 photo every issue here in Utah? Now that would be something to see!
BTW, NYTimes had a long piece the other day on the LA Times editor who just got fired for refusing to lay off still more people in the newsroom. Second editor gone for that reason in a year, I think. Owners insisting that the only way the paper can make money [aka "survive"] is to cut news staff and news coverage and go to more E! type stuff.
Hard times in the ink trade these days, Bill. Hard times. Saw a figure just the other day that in the 1970s something like 47% of adult Americans read a newspaper every day. Now it's something like 21%. [Of course, the population base is much larger, so the actual drop in numbers isn't that steep, but still....].
I used to ask students, first day of class, how many of them read a newspaper every day for any reason... even just sports or to get the TV listings. For any reason. Maybe... maybe twenty five percent of them raised their hands. And these were college students... presumably a cut above the average citizen in terms of education, general knowledge and interest in staying informed. Twenty five percent. Tops. And that was some years ago. [I don't ask any more. Too depressing. ]
The habit is not being passed on. My dad had Herald Tribune tucked under his arm when he took the train to work each day, and had Newsday tucked under his arm when he came home. I can't recall a day that didn't begin for him with a morning paper. And I got the habit but good. My students don't have it.
And WSU provides the NYT and [for a time] the SE in racks free to students during the term. Free. Gratis. No charge. And most days, dozens of the papers remain at the end of the day, uncollected and unread. Free for god's sake. If I specifically point out something in the Times that bears on what we're doing in class, a handful will pick up a copy on their way out. But only a handful. And only if I specifically point them at a particular article.
Not good for the Republic, Bill. And no, electronic media and the internet do not fill the gap. Not even close.
et:
The questions about the ice tower are these: Should it be built and operated with public funds? And can it be financially self-sustaining if it is built? Neither of those is a trivial question. I haven't seen any discussion at all by its proponents of the second question. Absolutely nothing.
As for the first question: there are those here with philosophical objections to any public investment in such projects. I'm not necessarily one of them. But I am opposed to public subsidies for financially non-sustainable attractions like this over the long term. So no support from me until that second question gets some attention and some plausible answering.
As for the conservation end: the problem is not, I think, water use. Relatively minimal. The problem is energy use: how much power is it going to take to keep those ice faces frozen 24/7 from say April to December? And that relates, for me, directly to the sustainability question. With power prices on the rise [and not much chance of them coming down], will the operating costs for the ice tower require continuing and large public subsidies?
If the proponents can build and operate it with private capital, donations and use fees, I have no objections to their building. But that they can hasn't been demonstrated yet. One RAMP grant to help get things off the ground --- I believe $200,000 has already been approved --- I wouldn't object to. But the estimated costs of building this are rising very fast. [Began at a quarter of a million or so last year, and have now gone well north of a million two.] And I've seen no numbers at all on the probable annual operating budget, and probable revenues from user fees.
So it's all still, for me, pretty much up in the air, and I'll have to say "no" until some of the questions so far being ignored get addressed with some seriousness.
Bill c..............you posted while I was writing. I cannot resist.
WCF has become the voice of OGDEN. And congratulations to all you folks for keeping up the good work. There is better investigative journalism publsihed here, than the SE can ever hope to publish. The interests, backgrounds and sources bloggers PUBLISHING here are far more interesting and diverse than even the SLC T and the DN.
So blog on, I say.
All news print is eating it's shorts that they are losing readers to independent bloggers. Yeah, we only need a few people like Curm, TJ, Bill C, Rudi, to read the SE online, and start the ball rolling.
Google boy will remind us that we can all look up stuff, and hot link it in. Participatory journalism is here. Not the wave of the future.
Fortunately for the financial future of the Sanduskis, Murdocks, etc., they keep their web pressses rolling and paid for by all those tacky FSI that fall out of any paper, on their way to the recycle bin.
I do critique some of my Ogden armchair DEMS, whose main contribution to partipatory democracy is all the epithets they vociferously hurl at the closest TV, when Jon Stewart holds forth. WCF has given many of us, who are interested in more than that for Ogden, a convenient place to meet in cyber space, as our schedules permit.
Just because we have not heard from Rupert Hitzig recetnly, re whatever, does not mean he is not tuning in, from time to time. And collecting DATA. Not to mention most of the Ogden City council members. Did I hear Amy cough!!
I do check to see if www.dialOgden.com has as many reader comments being blogged in as wcf does. So far, WCF.. I cannot count....and DO...."0."
Curmudgeon
Welcome back, you certainly keep us grenadiers on our toes with your pesky facts!
I think I must side with Frank and Bill on this question of the Ernest deal and Schwebke's article.
If you go back and listen to the tapes of the council meeting with Ernest officials two years ago, I think you will find that the council's questioning of them was neither aggressive nor vigorous. Councilman Glasmann merely ask the guy if he could provide financials on his company to the board as the Mayor's office had given them absolutely no information on the company or proposal. This question was asked with respect and in the midst of a rather genial discussion. There was absolutely no aggressiveness or challenging attitude involved.
The idea that somehow the council challenged Ernest in a nasty manner was just another vile and lying maneuver by the Little Lord. One of many I might add.
The new council had just taken office, this was one of the first meetings of that new council. That new council was made up of three new members that had won office on anti Godfrey and open government platforms. Godfrey was embarrassed over the loss of his sycophants to these new members and was looking for a shot to vent his petty vindictiveness and show them who the top dog in town was.
This negative questioning of Ernest was a fiction created by Godfrey to hit the new council over the head with a sledge hammer and paint them to the people as incompetent and obstructionist. The Ernest guy half heartedly went along with the dirty little game Godfrey was playing. It worked unfortunately. Godfrey and his pack of liars got a lot of press, especially from the Sub Standard, painting the new council members as dumb asses who were unfriendly to new business. The sheer dishonesty and nastiness of the attack, which the Sub Standard fully participated in, shocked and intimidated the new council members and took the steam out of any momentum they may have had to force the Godfrey administration into being open and honest with the citizens.
The Standard is still perpetuating the lie they helped create two years ago. For Schwebke to continue to put forth that lie in this article is dishonest at worst, and incompetent at best. It certainly doesn't come close to fitting in with the code of journalistic ethics as outlined by Mono.
E.T.,about Jeff Lowe, he's a great guy, but, he's getting old. He's had a hell of a life experience and has enjoyed many things most will not. That said, why should the folks in Ogden have to pay?
This thing is not viable and Jeff knows it. Ice climbing enjoys less fanfare and participation than the Ted Bundy fan club.
No one has mentioned it here as of yet, but the outdoors section of the SE ran an article about an ice climb of Malan's Waterfall yesterday. I won't suggest any ill-motive as to the timing of it, could just be chance. The writer, Johnson actually did a good job. But the whole point was despite the fear and discomfort, he had fun, and that was what it was supposed to be all about. None of what he described in the article could be experienced in the controlled sterile enviroment provided by this indoor Holograghic contraption.
It's all about getting out and doing it, the risks are a huge part of why you do it. That what lures the very few people that do it. Some things just can't be bottled packaged and sold, sorry, but it's true.
Plus I may never forgive Jeff for destroying the sanctity of maybe the most sacred of places in the local area. A place that has been sacred for thousands of years to people that were here and are now gone, feared extinct, he installed that unused ridiculus via ferratta in waterfall canyon.
I was right about the rush-rush job done on the RDA. In a Jan 2 2006 WCF article, Mr. Harmer wasn't mentioned, but John Patterson is quoted as saying "time is of the essence" as he presented the Ernest Health proposal to the RDA.
I don't have a permalink, but it's on the Ernest Health link, at the bottom.
Curm, I have to disagree with you. I know Mr. Schwebke doesn't write the headlines, but the headline said:
Ogden-Ernest Health Deal Delayed (tease on front page)
Property Sale for New Hospital Delayed (article headline)
The headline should have ensured that the idea of the delay was attributable solely to Mr. Harmer.
Given that they won't run a story that is headlined "Mayor Lies on Crime Statistics" that is sourced completely and totally to Monotreme, I don't see why they would write a story with this headline sourced completely and totally to Mr. Harmer. There is no reason Mr. Harmer is presumed to be more correct on this issue than the quoted Ernest Health official.
A good lede for the story would be something like:
A city official says that the sale of Ogden River Project property to Ernest Health will be delayed until this summer, but a company official denies that any change of plans is imminent.
That frames the story much better, and points up the essential dispute over the facts that make it a real news story, instead of a city press release.
Mono:
Well, the Ernest exec left himself an out... that bit about having been out of the office of late. If it turns out the delay happens, as Harmer said it will, we can conclude that the SE got the story right [putting emphasis on the delay as the main element]. However, if it turns out there is no delay, I'll agree that the SE got the story wrong, emphasized the wrong element of it, and so ended up misleading its readers.
Now what might be appropriate is an editorial in the Casey Stengel vein... Casey who found himself [for his sins] managing the worst team in baseball, the brand new New York Mets, and who asked in despair, "can't anyone here play this game?" Good question of the SE to ask of Harmer/Godfrey and Ernest in this matter.
As for headlines, as you note, Mr. Schwebke does not compose them. Hell, Mono, these are the guys who ran a headline just the other day saying that the proposed indoor water park would enhance Ogden's outdoor appeal. Not sure what they're smokin' over there in the SE headline writers room....
As for "aggressive." I know Godfrey & Co. manipulated the press and public opinion, creating the general notion [with Ernest's help] that the company's representatives had been attacked by the new Council members. It was a very effective PR move and it worked. They knew what they were doing and they did it well. However, seemed to me then, seems to me know, that asking a company to provide its financials to a Council when it had been assured by the Mayor that such tacky questions, requiring facts, would not be asked and that the skids had been greased, could well have seemed vigorous [at least] and aggressive even to the execs being asked. In any case, seems to me now quibbling over phrasing over an incident long past, and so not all that significant in the end. That's all.
Which goes back to something you and I agree upon, and have for a while, I think: the ease with which the Administration has been able to manipulate the press and so to shape the public/pr perception of what has happened. They count on the press taking them at their word. But this time, it didn't work, or not as well as it had in the past. Mr. Schwebke fact-checked Harmer's claim and the facts didn't check, and he said so. Seems hard, to me, to jump on the SE for doing in this case what a lot of us have criticized it for not doing in the past. This time, he did the fact-checking the SE should do all the time, every time, with every official statement by elected public officers or their appointees. That, I thought, merited a pat on the back, not another verbal assault.
Mr. Curmudgeon, sometimes I really wonder about you!
I was at the meeting where the Ernest executive was allegedly attacked. It never happened, not even close. There was NO AGGRESSION of any kind involved. The Ernest executive was not defensive or put off in any way at the time it happened. There were smiles all around. It was a total non event. Glasmann and Stevens both asked a very few innocuous questions and the guy was not offended by them in the least.
Your perception of what happened is totally off course. You represented, and now cling to, the notion that there was some sort of aggressive behavior on the RDA board's part. Then when that is refuted by some one that was there you take the position that we are "quibbling over phrasing over an incident long past, and so not all that significant in the end". Talk about a cop out!
It was a very significant event wherein the mayor created a big lie in attacking the new council, the lie was magnified and propagated by the Standard and two years later they are still repeating the same fiction, and you are now declaring it "not all that significant".
I'm sure you will come back with another passel of drivel to justify your position and prove me wrong. You are very cleaver at covering your ass after all. Maybe that comes from many years playing mind games with your students? You remind me of the old joke about the guy that claims he was only wrong once in his life and that was only because one time he thought he was wrong when he actually wasn't.
This time your dogged defense of Schwebke and the Sub Standard is not going to stand. You're talking out of your ass on this one.
When you're wrong you ought to just fess up or shut up. You should try it once before you die. It actually feels pretty good.
Oz:
Let me try one more time. I wrote:
I know Godfrey & Co. manipulated the press and public opinion, creating the general notion [with Ernest's help] that the company's representatives had been attacked by the new Council members. It was a very effective PR move and it worked. They knew what they were doing and they did it well. However, seemed to me then, seems to me now, that asking a company to provide its financials to a Council when it had been assured by the Mayor that such tacky questions, requiring facts, would not be asked and that the skids had been greased, could well have seemed vigorous [at least] and aggressive even to the execs being asked. In any case, seems to me now quibbling over phrasing over an incident long past, and so not all that significant in the end. That's all.
Hizzonah thought he had the fix in, assured Ernest that the fix was in and no substantive questions would be asked. Some were. And Hizzonah and his Spin Team successfully spun that into the "attacked" story when Ernest backed out of a purchase it didn't seem all that eager to make in the first place, as the current continuing delay illustrates yet again. [Mono's point.] None of which I think we disagree on, you and I.
But the story for those who are not Godfreyistas has changed a bit over time too, in reaction to the success of the Godfrey spin. The first reaction at the time, as I recall, was that thank God some of the new Council members were asking probing questions and demanding information that the Mayor had refused to provide. 'Bout time was the reaction of many right here on WCF as I recall. And explanations [accurate ones] that they had no choice but to ask such questions at the Council meeting in open session because the Mayor had repeatedly refused to provide answers to their questions in the weeks before the meeting.
Then Godfrey's spin team went into action... and very successfully... when Ernest withdrew its purchase offer. [Give the devil his due, Oz: they worked it brilliantly.] Then... and only then... the opposition switched from "about time the Council starting asking tough questions" to "there was no tough questioning, it was a love fest."
And I think all this hooraw aimed at Schwebke over his using the term "aggressive" in his way down in the story summary of the history of Ernest in Ogden has, in the end, the effect of getting folks involved in semantic disputes over long past events instead of focusing on what Hizzonah & Gang are up to today, right now here in river city. The big story, I thought was(a) Harmer's statement about the delay (b)the fact that the company would not corroborate Harmer's claim (c)the fact that Schwebke dug out the contradiction and reported it. Next to that, the "aggressive" flap seemed like very small... and old... potatoes to me. Still does.
As for admitting error, if you're as faithful a WCF reader as I think you are, you're having a senior moment. I've withdrawn comments and posted corrections here more times than I like to remember, and doubtless will again.
did you guys ever stop to think that maybe ernst never intended to buy the property or start construction right away. that it might have been the adminisrtation that made that suggestion to support their success story.
ernst may rethink their placement as well with the va hospital coming to town. it may be competition or it may be synergistic depending on the market ernst was or is going after.
i hope the rda board had a time certain clause in their contract and a mandate that they can only buy the property if the build as indicated. i.e. not resell the property for a profit.
Post a Comment