Troubled Telluride hotel development serves as a reminder that there is no such thing as a "can't lose" proposition
By Curmudgeon
This from today's New York Times. A major Telluride ski resort development is in trouble... yet again. [Wasn't Telluride offered up as an example of how gondolas are a can't lose proposition for building ski resort business?].
Now, that noted, I'm not saying that because this monster development at Telluride has failed repeatedly that the proposed Malan's basin mini-resort must fail as well. The point I want to make is that there are, in such matters, no sure things. There are no "can't lose" propositions. And what Ogden city ought to be doing, when it's asked to participate in something the golf course/gondola/Malan's Basin project, to devote public assets to supporting such, is to take a long, hard look at the evidence, and to decide if city involvement is or would be a prudent risk for the city government to take with public property and resources. And there is always risk. And when three separate projects -- golf course real estate development, gondola/gondola systems, Malan's ski resort --- must succeed for it all to work out, the risks are multiplied significantly.
What I guess it all boils down to is: "Beware of boosters." When a Mayor and his pet Chamber of Commerce and crony developers are screaming "this can't lose!" and "Ogden will be the new Aspen if you just give us what we want" and that those who refuse to meekly roll over are "against progress" or "idiots" --- recall Lift Ogden's Mr. Ed Allen saying at Mr. Peterson's first gondola/resort "panel show" at WSU when Allen realized people were asking questions and looking skeptical about the practicality of the plans, "they're all idiots up here" --- well, when all that starts to gear up and the bandwagon begins to roll and the Chamber's tub-thumpers begin thumping tubs, the smart thing to do is get a tight hold on the city's wallet, and start asking hard questions, and demanding that assertions be backed with fact, illustration and example [aka evidence] so that a reasonable judgment about the risk involved can be made, and the city can then make a reasoned judgment about whether committing city resources would be a prudent thing to do. I suspect the original investors in the Telluride white elephant, and subsequent ones, were all promised "this can't lose." But it did. Even with a gondola....
© 2005 - 2014 Weber County Forum™ -- All Rights Reserved
11 comments:
Good points once again Curm. And when I first read this I was thinking in terms of Boosters Boosting Ogden City, which Ogden has a long history of. However, that is clearly not the case here. The people who have been ceaselessly pushing this project are not Boosters of Ogden. They are in fact just the opposite. They have Boosted this one large project, while condemning Ogden at the same time. Just my 2 cent ramble, for what its worth.
How many "idiots" from Dist 10 will support Ed Allen, since he is behind a Gondola. Now that he will need support watch him change his story to suit the election, just like his son-in-law.
The Gondola will rise again.....
Wendy:
Exactly. Think of Hizzonah, The Mayor, lead "booster" of the gondola/park sale/Malan's Basin plan, simultaneously, repeatedly, describing Mt. Ogden Golf Course as "unplayable" and "not golfer friendly." Diminishing one of Ogden's public attractions in order to [he hoped] increase support for his gondola schemes.
Ogden has much to recommend it --- hell, I moved here because it did, and does --- and city officials ought to be promoting and advertising the city and its advantages. That is not, as you pointed out, what I meant by "boosterism." Thanks for making that point more clearly than I did.
I just wanted to put a plug in for Rep Neil Hansen. He is one that needs to stay in the legislature.
Here is a report card from the taxpayer association.
2008 Utah Taxpayers Association Legislative Scorecard.
The Utah Taxpayers Association annually issues legislative report cards to its members and the public. The 2008 scorecard rates Utah’s 104 legislators on 15 key tax and spending related bills in the House and 16 in the Senate. In the House, seven of the votes were supported by the Association and passed without a dissenting vote, meaning the lowest possible House score (unless there were absences) on this year’s scorecard was 46.7. In the Senate, six of the votes
were supported by the Association and passed without a dissenting vote, meaning the lowest possible
Senate score (unless there were absences) on this year’s scorecard was 37.5%.
House Summary
The average score in the House was 72.9%. Seven Representatives, all Republicans, scored above 90.0%: John Dougall, Ken Sumsion, Mike Morley, Curt Oda, Mark Walker, Carl Wimmer and Greg Curtis.
Democrat Neil Hansen (84.6%) scored better than 32 Republicans.
The lowest scoring Representatives include Carol Spackman Moss (42.9%), Mark Wheatley (42.9%),
David Litvack (42.9%), Neal Hendrickson (45.5%), Jackie Biskupski (46.7%), Rebecca Chavez-Houck (46.7%), Janice Fisher (46.7%), Phil Riesen (46.7%), Christine Johnson (46.7%), Rosalind McGee (46.7%), and Jennifer Seelig (46.7%). The Representatives scoring below 50% are Democrats. Mel Brown (64.3%), Sheryl Allen (64.3%) and Fred Hunsaker (64.3%) were the lowest scoring Republicans, scoring lower than Democrat Neil Hansen (84.6%).
Sounds like we gotta Neil Hansen Booster roamin' the site...
Free enterprise is neat, in that it allows failure and success. Those who fail are limited, and those who succeed get to have more money to do more things.
The problem in Ogden is the government gets involved, insulating the losers from failure, and changing the rules by favoring certain businesses.
It's Cronytown. That's the real problem - the city council should be deciding how many potholes to fill this year, not deciding whether to become "partners" in projects that should always be private.
That's the larger issue. Let the "boosters" show how much they favor a project by brining their own money. If they have none, then they should admit they are small players and leave the rest of us and our public assets alone.
I agree Danny, if you rent/lease from the city you need to pay the full cost that the city is paying, not subsidized. If an ice tower needs to be built, let the boosters build snd run it. We all live here for the outdoors and quality of life. I don't want to sacrifice our city to those that have just moved here and think they know what is best for me. I want the city council to concentrate on CITY SERVICES and not development, unless they can get businesses in the empty buildings on Washington Blvd stores, the now empty First Serurity building, the IGA on 24th, Golds empty Gym on 25th and other open space away from the foothills. I don't want to keep hearing the empty promises and want some action. We need real investors, not ones just looking for Grants, like the Windsor Hotel, before they invest.
I'm wondering how the Salomon Center is doing by now. Has the city council monitored its perfomance? Will the Godfrey lackeys on the council let the citizens know how it's doing, month to month?
Last summer the bond payment, $775 thousand, was paid from BDO revenue.
What will happen this summer?
Enquiring citizens want to know.
enquiring citizen,
I doubt that we will be hearing anything about the Salomon Center revenue. It is none of the city's business the way our clever mayor set it up. As long as Gold's Gym pays the blanket lease payments that is all the city needs to know. That is all the city will ever know. The lease is in no way tied to revenue. It is a flat rate for 20 years or something regardless of market conditions. They pay roughly 1/4 of current market rates for prime commercial property and locked in with no incremental increases. It's a sweet deal..for Gold's.
Tec
At least he is still paying taxes on the old Golds on 25th. I might call the mayor's office if the grass doesn't get mowed, or grafetti shows up.
somewhere the city has to account for the debt portion of the salomon center. there should be monthly note payments.
that should be compared with the monthly rent that the center is generating before the city off sets those debt payments with the transfer of moneys from other rda projects.
this will tell you what the center is costing the city. my guess is about 150,000 dollars per month. a far cry more than the golf course.
Post a Comment