Ace Reporter Schwebke provides a story in this morning's Standard-Examiner, regarding Tuesday night's council work session, which was thoroughly reported yesterday in Curmudgeon's early morning report. The article headline pretty much sums up the tone of this morning's story: "Funds request not warmly welcomed." Indeed, it's our strong impression that the idea of dropping $200 thousand in taxpayer money on Boss Godfrey's Ice-tower Obsession has gotten zero traction with our sane and prudent Emerald City Council -- Councilman Stephenson excepted -- of course.
Mr. Schwebke's story did however have one element that left us scratching our head. This, from this morning's story:
The city has already received $200,000 in Weber County RAMP tax funds and a pledge for an equal amount of money that would be raised by Jeff Lowe, a renowned ice climber and executive director of Ogden Climbing Parks, which would manage, operate and maintain the tower, John Patterson, the city’s chief administrative officer, said during the work session. [Emphasis added].Up until now, we had been led to believe that the committees in charge of doling out RAMP funds had denied RAMP moneys for this patently goofball project; and we confess we are now experiencing some cognitive dissonance. We've even carefully examined the 2008 RAMP recommendations, and ice tower money seemed noticeably absent.
Did Mr. Patterson simply mis-speak; or does our Emerald City chief administrative officer have information to which we have not yet been made privy?
We heard privately that the RAMP selection committee had unceremoniously laughed the ice tower funding proposal out of the committee room, by the way.
So many questions... so few answers.
Perhaps our well connected Weber County Forum readership can help us out on this.
40 comments:
Check out the strip mall in Riverdale where J C Penny is located. It would have fit into where the Junction is, and I bet that it will generate twice what the Junction does in sales taxes for the city.
Instead we have condos, and offices that are not filling up. And a gym owned and leased at a discount to a fat slob.
ANd the RDA bonds that the city is not on the hook for?
Didnt the city pay off some RDA debt to the tune of around 6 million out of the general fund recently also?
Godfrey is a piece.
Oh, I am sure Patterson wouldnt tell a fib. He was just stretching the truth a littlebit. Kinda like being a little pregnant.
Lies and the lying liars that tell them.....
Please note that a private business is opening its doors this weekend. Summit Sports (formerly known as Inland Sports which was located in Layton) has relocated to Washington Blvd between 22nd and 23rd street. I encourage readers of WC forum, if already downtown, to drop in and check out a store that could actually add to "high adventure" in the Ogden area. Perhaps they will even sell thumb pads for all the "adventurous" hours at the Arcade across the street.
Ah'm confused.
Rudi:
The $200K was from the 2007 RAMP allotment; its board allowed the funds to carryover due to delays in design, implementation and, oh, let's see: fundraising inadeqaucies for a stupid-ass icecicle, AKA The Fortress of Mayoral Ego and otherwise and aptly dubbed as a moronic frozen dildo. The Gondola Examiner piece also makes mention of $500K "left" to be raised via sponsorships, when in fact there has been no such scratch -- zero, zip --raised. Reference Lying Little Matty Gondola Godfrey and His Forehead's letter of August 8, 2007,in which he repeatedly refers to the "Hollowgraphic Ice Tower," then the "Holographic Ice Tower." He and his fellow and short-man's diseased, high-adventure jackasses seek $75K per year in a multi-year commitment for tower naming rights; remember the Jackass Center, a much more visible presence, gave up its naming rights to Gondola Boy Mike Dowse, Jackass!, for nuthin'. But just pony up the $200K, OTown, and watch as Norse and Germanic adventurers book dozens of high-adventure trips to ice climb in August. Gondola jackasses.
THE SKI IS BEAUTIFUL BLUE
One way the so called Ice Tower could be successful...
Add raspberry flavoring and post a large sign that says,
EAT ME!
I still think Council should ask for an independent analysis of the engineering feasibility of their refrigeration system. To say I am skeptical about that would be an understatement.
I especially liked Mayor Godfrey's logic: "they opposed the Eiffel Tower; they oppose my Fortress of Mayoral Ego; ergo, the Fortress of Mayoral Ego will be Ogden's Eiffel Tower."
Two things, Mayor. 1. "They" opposed a lot of stupid ideas you've never heard of and that have never seen the light of day.
2. The Eiffel Tower was designed and built by an engineer, who was qualified to design and construct it. Where's the engineering analysis of this concept? I've read in several sources that it has been done. Pony up.
While he wants to "study" the transit issue some more, he goes head on into a project without even a shred of any "study". We have seen no engineering studies on this monstrosity and it's attendant refrigeration plant. This is no joke, council. Godfrey is an idiot and this one project will curse his career but should he do that on our dime.
I mean, in a worst case scenario, a gondola would at least move some people around. This ice tower thing is indescribably absurd. I consider myself an outdoor sportsman, and I am not in the least attracted to Ice climbing.
I come from a city that has its own "Eiffel Tower": St. Louis, which built the Gateway Arch (with federal funds) during the 60's. Since then, the Arch has become the city's defining symbol. And it certainly is an engineering marvel.
But the Arch hasn't helped the city in any significant, tangible way. Vast portions of St. Louis are essentially war zones, with block after block of boarded up, graffiti-covered buildings. Every year, St. Louis comes out at or near the top of the murders-per-capita list. Except for a few neighborhoods here and there, the city has been abandoned by everyone who can afford to leave. (My own parents wisely moved our familiy to the suburbs when I was 2, and never considered moving back.)
Much more recently, St. Louis decided to invest in light rail (also paid for largely with federal funds). This investment seems to be paying off, with neighborhoods along the rail line actually seeing some rehabilitation through new private developments. Will it be enough? I don't know. But at least there's a tangible benefit, rather than just something to gawk at.
Couple of points:
1. I thought the SE story today was a good one. Caught the skepticism among some Council members about the Administration's rosy scenario estimates regarding the tower's finances nicely and conveyed it succinctly. And glad it brought up the anticipated "naming rights" funding. That figure is based on estimated number of tower users, I think, or some figure related to that or anticipated media mentions. Something like that. If the numbers that justify the anticipated asking price are too speculative for potential buyers of the naming rights, the sale price is likely to be considerably smaller than anticipated. Remember what the City got for the naming rights of the Recreation Center at the Junction. Zippo cash as I recall, though you could argue that landing Salomon by throwing in naming rights benefited O-Town. Still, nobody wrote a check.
2. From the discussion Tuesday, and today's story in the SE, I think the Administration may have gone to the rosy scenario well once too often for some Council members.[Whether they constitute a majority of the present Council, I am not at all certain, nor at this point, would I bet the baby's new shoes on it.] The Junction was to be built without the City being on the hook for the bonds... and the Administration had to back off that [which chicken came home to roost to the city's financial pain as the SE reported late last week]. The flatland gondola was going to be built entirely with private funds, the Mayor told the SE editorial board years ago when that Board first endorsed the idea. Only to have it become clear not long after that the city would have to put up 1/3 of the mega millions construction cost, and even so, to get the rest privately funded, would have to sell off the city's largest park for private real estate development. And finally, the tower in its original presentation was to be entirely funded by private sources, only to have the Mayor now asking that $200,000 of city money be put in, on top of $200,000 of taxpayers' money via RAMP... which he promises will be all that is required [unless of course the other "anticipated" sources don't actually materialize, in which case, he'll be back for more using the "we already have so much invested, we can't let it all go for nought" argument probably.]
3. The Eiffel Tower matter. To be fair to the Mayor, the point I think he was making when he compared the Ice Tower to the Eiffel Tower was that some people would love it, and some would hate it just as some Parisians hated the Eiffel Tower when it went up, and some loved it. That it would be impossible with any highly visible project to please [as the French say] "tous le monde et son pere." And of course he was implying that the Ogden Ice Tower, like the Eiffel Tower, would turn out in the end to be a great success, despite the carping and moaning of some [think "naysayers"] when it was first proposed. What he did not mention were great and expensive projects in which millions were sunk and it turned out that the doubters were right when the projects failed spectacularly. [Check out New Orlean's failed river-crossing gondola, built for the failed New Orleans World Fair, and intended as a public transit option when the fair closed for example. Link here].
I hope it isn't too late to let you know that the work meeting tonight is cancelled. There is no power at the Municipal Bldg. We were just informed.
Despite how idiotic lying little matty's "give to buddies) proposals are seen by the public at large, he keeps making them. A few times he's managed to dish out a million or two to one of them, mostly Brown making deals with himself, or a concern he was tied into recieving RDA money.
I'm starting to wonder what these guys have on him that he's now seemingly unconcerned with how the broader public veiws his actions and proposals. Is the common denominator in this peterson, leshem, geigers, lowe, neilson, brown, harmer and lying little matty cabal the one and only CAVENDISH?
Did Cavendish know them all individually before they knew each other? Is rupert holding secret footage that none of these guys want public?
Godfrey’s call-in show on Channel 17 Thursday night’s trying to sell the ice tower shows that he is desperate and running scared by trying to bull-doze the Council into a corner. Those who attended the budget adjustment work meeting are wondering, as I, how in the world he ever believed the Council were in agreement with him on the ice tower.
I asked for a copy of the business plan for the ice tower, along with a copy of the agreement that he says he has with Jeff Lowe defining that Mr. Lowe and his associates will maintain it and pay the utilities. Can you imagine how large that electrical bill will be? I cannot approve the ice tower any way without perusing those documents. I would be derelict in my fiscal responsibilities to the taxpayers if I did so. Also Council member Doug Stephens asked the Mayor why we didn’t take the proposed $200,000. for the ice tower and give it to the Mt. Ogden Golf Course to help improve the golf course which has been neglected and not supported by the Mayor. His response was that $200,000. was just a drop in the bucket and wouldn’t have any effect on the golf course. I have learned otherwise, and it would make a tremendous difference to the golf course.
I definitely did not get the feeling that there were four Council members who would vote for the ice tower. I believe the Mayor knows this, therefore, he had Jeff Lowe on his Channel 17 show. But I do not understand why he would so obviously misrepresent the truth and the Council.
I need to clarify that Doug did not indicate or hint that the Mayor has neglected the golf course, that was my interjection. The Council has urged the Mayor to advertise the golf course on brochures that are being used to promote Ogden, but he refuses. If he even halfway supported the golf course instead of running it down, I believe there would be more people playing the Mt. Ogden Golf Course.
There's a sign for Animal Services on the corner of Harrison and 20th. How about some signs on Harrison pointing out the turn to Mt. Ogden Golf Course?
Just a clarification: when Councilman Stephens asked the mayor why the 200K could not be spent on the golf course instead, he [Stephens] said the question had been asked of him by a constituent and that he was passing his constituent's question on to the Mayor. Councilman Stephens did not commit himself as to whether spending the money on the golf course instead of the tower would be a wise thing to do or not by asking the question. He was simply passing on a constituent's query.
As for the Mayor's using Channel 17 as his personal tub-thumping channel.... well, we're all too familiar with his treating the station as his personal plaything. Recall when he took to Channel 17 to oppose a school bond issue he didn't like, and refused advocates of the bond vote time to respond? That's our mayor! And remember the days when 17 was locally known as "The All Godfrey, All Geiger, All Gondolas, All The Time Channel?" Be interesting to see if those who think differently than Hizzonah does about the Ice Tower and spending more public money on it get an equal chance to make their views known via "our" [ha!] "community" [ha!] channel.
$200,000.00 would buy more than 50 new golf carts, that would go a long way towards improving the revenues,(rounds), as well as the image projected. It's a well know fact that the course loses $5 to $10 thousand on some weekends due to not having an adequate number of carts. This is also the same reason the course loses money hosting large corporate events, because they have to rent extra carts to accomidate their needs.
It's painfully obvious that lying little matty has done, nor will do nothing to improve things at the course. His fantasy corner of the universe is filled only with gondolas, icecicles and rental units.
Want more proof on how little Matty Godfrey lies? Some of you have mentioned the $6 Million RDA debt. Remember being told that the City and taxpayers don’t have to worry about RDA debt because it doesn’t belong to the City. That $6 million debt was covered by a loan from the General Fund and was to be repaid with various tax increment monies from RDA districts that do generate enough money now to repay that loan. Now the administration is asking the City Council to “write off” that $6 million loan. So the City and taxpayers are out $6 million IF the Council agrees to go along with the administration. $6 million!! Think what the City could do if it had $6 million in its General Fund?! We really have a choice administration leading the City! I have heard some say what a great businessman Godfrey is, but losing $6 million from the General Fund is not good business in my book. Should we mention the $5 million Woodbury lawsuit that the Mayor cost the City because he would not talk with them? People from Woodbury told a former Council Chairman that they would not have filed the lawsuit if the Mayor had only met and talked with them. But our great, egotistical leader would not lower himself to save the City and taxpayers $5 million besides all the thousands of dollars that the loan to cover that lawsuit has cost the City and taxpayers.
Rudizink has the Ogden leadership/administration pegged correctly! They are such great businessmen that they have agreed to let Boyer put in low-income housing apartments in the Junction. Just what Ogden needs! Now the loiterers and trouble makers will need only to walk out their front doors and walk a few yards to harass people and customers who visit the Junction!
Godfrey doesn't care about those things -- like Bill C says, he only cares about the gondola, the ice tower and putting Ogden in debt. Maybe we should call him the "Irresponsible Spendthrift Mayor!" Only in Ogden would voters return that kind of a "businessman" to lead their city!
Look at the condos/townhomes that the mayors best realtor friend Sue Wilkerson at Terra Venture is trying to sell in The Jefferson Historic District for $140K. How long before these will be low income rentals just to get someone occupying them. Try the condo website at the junction, who will pay $500K to live next to the kiddie rec center and IFLY?
More signs to the Mt. Ogden Golf course would help, it is the gem of Ogden but we can't the mayor to see it and stop running it down. How much more money will the city be in debt for before his final term is up?
After watching KSL and how the Mayor of Herriman has hired relatives and friends for 30% of the city offices has anyone looked into mayor Godfrey's hiring and influence. With Jeff Lowe, Geigers wife, Jo Packhams daughter, all being influenced by the mayor in being hired. Funny how they all actively supported him in his campaign. Looks more like a pay back for favors.
Can't Support:
While I hold no brief for Hizzonah and his conduct of his office, I think some of your criticism is off base, particularly that involving the $6 million write off of RDA debt.
First, the particular RDA projects involved and their financing were arranged I think before Godfrey took office, so they do not represent Godfrey-endorsed projects that fell short.
Second: bad debt is bad debt --- debt that cannot be collected. If the RDA projects have not and will not generate sufficient income to pay the money they were supposed to pay, pretending that that money will still come in, that the debt is not bad debt serves no useful purpose whatever.
The proper thing for a city to do with bad debt is write it off. Leaving debt known to be bad on the books as assets achieves nothing.
The projects didn't perform as expected. The money isn't going to come in. Makes no sense to pretend otherwise. On the matter of writing off these particular bad debts, I think the Mayor is right.
Curmudgeon, I can't believe that you condone ripping off the taxpayers to the tune of $6 million. Godfrey always seems to find money for his irresponsibe and hair-brained projects, so why shouldn't that money go to paying off that bad RDA debt? Most of his hair-brained ideas end up costing the taxpayers money. Look at the Junction -- the Counci just approved $1.5 million payment to keep it going because it isn't making the money he said it would. Face it! The thing that he does best -- is LIE!! The second thing he does best is put Ogden in deep debt!
Can't:
I'm not condoning "ripping off the taxpayers to the tune of $6 million." That money is never going to come in from the projects that were supposed to generate it. They's why it is bad debt. What are you suggesting? That the Administration take other money, raised by taxes, etc. and pay down the $6 million? That would achieve nothing, since it would involve the city paying itself its own money. It would not result in a single dime more for capital improvement projects, or sewer repairs or police and fire protection or anything else. Not a dime.
The Junction debt, however, is Godfrey's baby. He assured the Council the city would not end up paying off those bonds, and here, very early along, we're shelling out twice what was anticipated, and Council staff think there is a good chance we'll have to shell out the same, at least, next year. The extra payment this year comes to about $800K of income from BDO that will now not be available for other uses. All of that can, and should, be laid at the Mayor's doorstep. That debt, and this year's excess payment on it, are his babies. And the previous two Councils, by the way. They approved it. Ogden's having to pay $800K this year alone that Hizzonah assured the Council and the citizens that the city would not be on the hook for calls into question the soundness of his business judgment... which I hope the Council keeps firmly in mind as he delivers his latest rosy-scenario can't fail plea for another $200K in taxpayer funds for the Ice Tower project. $200K in public funds [via RAMP] the tower project has already gotten seems sufficient public earnest money to me. From here on in, the promoters of it need to raise their money privately.
The $6 million write-off you discussed above, however, involves projects in place before Godfrey took office. And, as I said, pretending the debt is good when it's not, won't achieve anything. What any sensible city, bank or business does with debt it cannot collect is to write it off. It's what the major investment banks are now doing with the billions in un-collectable sub-prime mortgages they invested in. When you cannot collect a debt, you write it off. There really is no other option.
Curmudgeon,
Not so fast. Just because certain RDA projects lose money doesn't mean the city's general fund should absorb the loss. It would be much more appropriate for the RDA itself to absorb it, through its many other projects that presumably make money.
Here it is, verbatim, from the Godfrey campaign web site:
Are the taxpayers footing the bill to redevelop RDA projects?
No. The bank is giving a loan through the RDA to the developer. Taxpayers are not paying for the redevelopment costs.
Who repays the loan?
The developer. The developer pays property taxes to the county based on the old property value and the new increased value of the re-developed land. The county sends a check for only a portion increased taxes [sic] to the RDA. The RDA then makes payment to the bank.
Are the taxpayers responsible to repay RDA debt?
No. State law calls for RDAs to be a separate entity different from the city, thereby protecting the taxpayers from ever having to pay for any failed projects.
What happens if the developer doesn't make the property tax payments?
Eventually, the property would be sold in a public tax action [sic]. The proceeds from the auction would be used to repay the loan. However, this is an unlikely, worse [sic] case scenario. Most developers wouldn't want to lose their property over a tax bill. Just like you wouldn't want to lose your home and land over a tax bill.
Dan:
I am not in any way suggesting Godfrey shouldn't be held accountable for his dissembling --- to the voters and to various Councils --- regarding the City's being on the hook for RDA debt that his administration created for the Junction and other projects. He absolutely should.
But if the debt on the previous projects is in fact bad debt... money that cannot be collected and is never going to come in... then writing it off seems the only sensible thing to do. And as I understand it --- happy to be corrected if I have it wrong --- the $6 million does not involve money that the city will have to pony up to pay off bonds. It involves anticipated revenues from various older RDA projects, which revenues did not materialize. So we lose nothing, so far as I can see, by taking it off the books. The money isn't going to come in no matter how long we wait because the projects did not succeed as well as had been hoped.
The Junction bond RDA debt is another matter. If the Junction fails, then the City will have to pony up millions, for years, to pay the bonds off. We seem, in fact, already to have begun doing that. [The $800K.] Not all "debt" is the same.
Curmudgeon, you missed this one! The $800K is to cover the shortfall in sales tax due to a slowing of the economy. In this $2.9 million budget adjustment the Council has been asked to take $1.5 million of the carry-over from FY2007 to pay some of the bond debt on the Junction. So we've already started to pay millions of dollars on the Junction!
You say the $6 million is not Godfrey's debt. I disagree. The projects may have started under other mayors, but for the last 8 years Godfrey has been the chief administrator of all of the revenue, debt and all projects and whether they succeed or fail. So under his business acumen, those RDA projects failed, just like he attempting to do with the golf course. If you can't see it, the only things that succeed under Godfrey's administration are HIS projects.
Don't forget that the Ogden City taxpayers paid last year's Junction bond payment too,
If you add it all up, Ogden taxpayers will have picked up the Junction tab for four years (20% of the total 20-year bond payment) in a row, if you factor in this year's double payment.
This is what happens when lame Ogden City voters elect somebody whose main previous business experience was being a pizza delivery boy, to a third mayoral term.
Still, nitwits who wear magic underwear will no doubt continue to "faithfully believe" that the diminutive and genetically-aberrant mayoral cretin is actually a "business genius."
Some genius!
Godfey: a gift from the Mormon God!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Can't Support:
You wrote: Curmudgeon, you missed this one! The $800K is to cover the shortfall in sales tax due to a slowing of the economy. In this $2.9 million budget adjustment the Council has been asked to take $1.5 million of the carry-over from FY2007 to pay some of the bond debt on the Junction.
Didn't miss it at all. The Council is being asked to allocate $800 from reserve funds to cover a shortfall in sales taxes, as you note. The city had also already put in it's budget money to cover an expected payment of about $800K to service the debt on the Junction bonds. What the Mayor asked for Tuesday night was an additional $800K to be taken from BDO revenues to service the Junction bond debt, because properties that had been expected to be on the tax rolls at the Junction by now had not been completed, so were not generating revenue for the city. [The expected payment of $800K on the bonds and the additional $800K the Mayor wants now, add up to the about $1.5 million we will be paying on the Junction bonds this year. I didn't miss it.]
And as "Knows Jack" points out, a substantial amount of BDO revenues will, by the end of this year, already have gone to pay Junction construction bonds, which Hizzonah assured us all, and the Council, the city would not be on the hook for. And there is, the Council staff says, a good chance it will continue next year as well.
As for the old RDA projects that have underperformed: sorry, but it's really not fair to lay them at Godfrey's feet, anymore than it would be fair to lay whatever millions the city may have to shell out for Junction construction bond notes after a new Mayor comes in at the new Mayor's feet. And no need, really, to blame Godfrey for the older RDA projects underperforming. There is more than enough he has to answer for, things done on his watch, without trying to shoehorn projects that he inherited when he became Mayor into his bag of responsibilities too.
Yes, even Hizzonah is entitled to fair treatment in public discussion. All of Ogden's elected officials, or appointed ones, are, whether you and I voted for them or not.
Curmudgeon:
The $6M debt, as I understand it, was a debt owed by the RDA to the city's general fund. The RDA is not out of business, so the debt is, in principle, collectible. Now it may be that the particular revenue that the RDA was counting on to pay off the debt hasn't materialized. But the RDA itself is not bankrupt and it certainly has assets that could be applied toward paying off this debt to the city.
Here's an analogy: Suppose I go to a bank for a loan to buy a car. My plan is to use the car to run a delivery service, and with the income from this business I'll be able to pay off the debt. But unfortunately, my new business never makes much money, and meanwhile the car depreciates to nothing so my plan has failed. Does the bank write off the loan as a bad debt? Of course not! They come after my house, or whatever other assets I may have. Perhaps I've even managed to start another successful business, out of my home, for which I don't need the car. Do I spend the income from that business paying off my debt for the car, or do I spend the income going gambling in Wendover? Godfrey is doing the latter, putting all available RDA revenues into high-risk gambling projects instead of using the money to pay off that old debt to the general fund.
Curm:
In your 3:12 post are you really arguing that Godfrey shouldn't be held responsible for debts incurred by previous RDA directors? That's like saying that whenever a company hires a new CEO, all its debts should be wiped clean--even if it has assets that outweigh those debts!
Dan:
You are playing word games. Ogden City is responsible for previously incurred RDA debt, and so any mayor in office is responsible for dealing with that debt once he is in office. But not responsible for incurring it. Godfrey is not responsible [in the sense of "to blame"] for incurring that debt in the first place. If you're happier with "blame" as a synonym for "responsible," use that instead.
Curm:
Ok, for the sake of argument, let's say that Godfrey, who has been RDA director for the last 8 years, bears no blame for the underperformance during those 8 years of RDA projects that were initiated under a previous director.
(That seems like quite a stretch! Does he get credit for the performance of RDA projects, initiated before he took office, that have done well during the last 8 years?)
Whether he gets blame/credit or not, Godfrey and the RDA are still responsible for making payments on the loans that were taken out to fund those underperforming projects. Whether they get the money to pay off the loans from those particular projects doesn't really matter. The RDA should still be responsible for paying off its debt.
Knows Jack:
At last, someone sees the psychology of electing Godfrey for what it is. It's very refreshing. Thank you.
Dan:
You asked: Does he get credit for the performance of RDA projects, initiated before he took office, that have done well during the last 8 years?)
Answer: No. They're not his projects.
Dear Curm, you are a facts type of guy. Why haven't you asked for the specifics of each of these failed RDAs and an explanination of the rational that determined them failed? Surely someone should have to explain the specifics, the Council wouldn't just take lying little matty's word for anything at this point. Would they?
And you know how hard arguing theory with a physisist is.
In response to Knows Jack's theory, supported by the great Moroni, let's explore further.
A people who's foundation is predicated on such a metaphysical phenomena accompanied by a belief that they too are capable of such an interpersonal experience and communication with their Creator would long for such an experience.
When one of their own proclaims to have had this experience,(lying little matty) they would not be prone to doubt the veracity of his claim. In fact the would regard him as special, willing to overlook all his prior shortcomings and dismiss them because like them, he's human. So, they had no reservations when it came to electing him for a third go round.
The sneaky little liar knew this would work, and planned it all along. In fact that explains the timing of the golden gondola devine vision announcement. It worked so well that like Warren Jeffs he became drunk with the feeling of false divinity and started believing it himself, forgetting that it was just a strategy conjured up in the Cavendish basement homosexual pediphile torture chamber and family photo gallery.
Now, lying little matty and a selected few (Ed Allen) believe that he's been launched on an accelerated progression to Godliness, yes, lying little matty believes he's soon to be God. This pretty much explains his words,actions and behavior for the last 4 years, but this is also manifested in the rapid growth of his nose and forehead. Yes folks, he's just an imperfect run of the mill, or less, human, suffering from the dreaded pinnoccio syndrome,(nose), and over inflated ego with nowhere to store it,(forehead). If this condition persists, lying little matty will slip permanently into his own fantasy interpretation of heaven where the only transportation will be golden gondolas to exactly nowhere surrounded by giant icecicles. He'll have multiple wives including Janeth Wright,(a 50 year younger version), G-Train Wilkerson (not looking as if just being dragged over the Curtis Creek road)and of course his current wife and Ed's daughter, Monica, bruises all healed.
Potato Nose will be there, face restored, and short deck with a full head of his own hair,rugless.(his deck will remain at less than 44, for his own good). Cavendish will openly fondle young boys, and Jeff lowe will be scaling unknown hights and pulling a thorazine sedated wayne peterson behind him, vested of course.
HEAVEN, lying little matty high adventure style.
Note: Brandon Stephenson has not been ommitted, with 3 wives and Cavendish, lying little matty needs no lap dog in his Heaven.
In lieu of flowers, send all donations to: Golden Gondola and Icecicle stash, lying little matty's ass, 9th floor nirvana, Ogden City Munincipal Building.
Dan S,
You are bang on in your view of the RDA responsibility to pay back the city. Ogden City made seed capital loans to the RDA with the full understanding that the city would be paid back in full.
The RDA is a separate corporate entity that is financially solvent, has current positive cash flow and has the responsibility to pay off the city with revenues generated from its projects that are making money. The fact that some of the projects are not doing well, projects that preceded Godfrey involvement, is irrelevant. If anyone follows Curmudgeon’s logic that the RDA is only responsible for debt incurred since Godfrey’s involvement in the organization, they would be wrong.
By charter the RDA is responsible for its own debt (and as stated many times by Godfrey). RDA’s current management (Godfrey) does not want to recognize the RDA’s current financial responsibilities for past decisions that did not work out. The responsibility to pay off these past investment obligations would simply limit the availability of currently generated RDA revenues that are viewed by Godfrey as necessary revenue sources for current and future pet projects. Without these RDA revenues that Godfrey seems to control without much upfront oversight, he would be required to get City Council approval for future loans (to fund his projects) from the City General Fund or various city department budgets. This would slow down his perceived progress and put his spending practices under the scrutiny of the City Council. Scrutiny that should be taking place.
The RDA has several projects that are performing very well and is financially well enough to pay off the obligations of those projects that are under performing. The decision to pay or not pay all of its obligations to the City should be made by the RDA board not the city administration. Ogden City officials should never suggest that any loan is a nonperforming loan without written notice from the owing party to that effect. If the City knows that the entity has the capability to pay the debt then the city should consider taking legal actions against that entity. RDA has the money to pay.
Although the boards of the City and the RDA are basically the same, the entities are completely separate. City Council should require the RDA to pay their debt to the City and RDA board members should cut back spending to keep their budget in balance or look to acquire new loans if they want to fund future projects that exceed their cash flow. Ogden City has loaned the RDA at least $12 million dollars. Ogden City Council should not allow the RDA, a separate corporate entity, to forgo its financial obligation to the City. If Ogden City is not paid back in full then the City Council in its fiduciary role as guardians of the city must not loan any more money to a solvent corporate entity that is proposing to walking away from 50% of it financial obligation to the City.
Bill:
I don't think it's a good idea, nor do I think it's right, to drag any public person's family members into a dispute over public policy. Even satirically.
Hail Bill C.!
Funniest post in eight months.
THE SKI IS BEAUTIFUL BLUE
Post a Comment