Thursday, June 26, 2008

The Corporate Welfare State Remains Alive and Well In Ogden

The reader response to this article are SO HOT... We've moved it to "front page, top"

This morning's Standard-Examiner delivers a brief summary of last night's Council/RDA sessions, in which he reports that our city council voted 4-3 to squander another $100 thousand on yet another ill-conceived Godfrey pipedream. Unfortunately, the story is a mite thin, we think. Although several projects and initiatives were on last night's agendas, Ace Reporter Schwebke, for reasons unknown, limits his reporting to the council's treatment of the Ice Tower Project. Notwithstanding this deficiency, we nevertheless incorporate a few of Mr. Schwebke's key paragraphs below:
OGDEN — By a 4-3 vote, the city council amended the municipality’s budget Tuesday night enabling the allocation of $100,000 for construction of a controversial ice climbing tower.
The allocation is part of an overall budget amendment that earmarks $2.7 million in fiscal 2007 carryover money and BDO lease proceeds to finance a variety of city projects and initiatives.
City council members who voted against the budget amendment included Dorrene Jeske, Amy Wicks and Doug Stephens. [...].
The budget amendment requires the $100,000 onetime allocation be used only for construction of the tower and prohibits the money from being spent until funds are raised to complete the project.
By process of elimination,we suppose it's fair to deduce that these are the publicly elected fiduciaries, YOUR city council members, who thought it was quite alright to dole out $100 thousand of YOUR hard-earned taxpayer dollars, to roll the dice on this nit-witted project, and put Jeff Lowe's private company on the public dole:
• Jesse Garcia
• Caitlin Gochnour
• Blaine Johnson
• Brandon Stephensen
The corporate welfare state remains alive and well in Ogden, while financial prudence and discipline fly out the council chamber window. We believe these four should be ashamed of themselves.

Mr. Schwebke notes one dissenting council member's objection to the commitment of public funds toward this project:
[Councilwoman] Jeske said she opposed the amendment because taxpayer funds shouldn’t be used to help construct the $1.6 million ice tower planned for the corner of 25th Street and Kiesel Avenue. “It’s supposed to be a private enterprise,” she said.
According to other sources however, we believe Ms. Jeske's objection may have been more complicated than that, in which connection we incorporate this information received in a lower article comment section last night from gentle reader Steve A.:
Councilwoman Jeske tried to persuade the other Council members for more than 15 minutes saying that a summary document that they had received Friday had areas of concern that stated the City would be responsible for the construction, the refrigeration and everything else to make it operational.
Is there a document floating out there which would bind Ogden City to contribute to this boneheaded project beyond the limitations set forth in last night's conditional budget allocation? Has Boss Godfrey entered into any separate agreements with Jeff Lowe which might require further contributions from the city, in the event that the project fails to meet rosy expectations? If so we'd love to get our hands on them.

And what about the other items which were set for last night's agenda? Ace Reporter Schwebke provides nothing about the other projects and initiatives which we discussed yesterday:
• The 2008 Junction Bailout ($1.5 million)
• High Adventure Business Recruitment Scheme ($200 thousand)
• Debt Reduction Plan
Perhaps a few of our readers can offer their own comments and observations, to fill in the blanks left by Mr. Schwebke's short article, which (now that we think about it) may have suffered from the constraints of a tight publication deadline.

80 comments:

Anonymous said...

Rudi:
On Mr. Schwebke focusing on only one topic. Some time ago, two years or so now I think, I inquired of one of the editors at the SE why a Council session story covered only one topic when the meeting, which I attended, covered several. He told me that the Council story came in late, necessarily, after normal deadline for the next morning's paper, that only a certain amount of fixed space was reserved for it so something would appear next morning, and that the editors had decided, as a policy matter, that their reporter should deal with only one [presumably the most significant] topic of each meeting, and that other significant topics raised at Council meetings could/would be covered in stand-alone stories later in the week. That this they thought was better than having only a few sentences about several different topics in the morning-after story.

We can argue about whether this is a good policy or not --- and it occurs to me that the SE's ability to post news on its website eliminates to some extent the space constraints --- but in any case, the decision was an editorial one, not Mr. Schwebke's. So if you want to pile on someone about it, it's the editors you should go after, not the reporter this time.

OgdenLover said...

I'd like to thank the three Council members (Wicks, Jeske, and Stephens) who voted FOR fiscal responsibility. As for the rest, "What were you thinking?" or "Were you thinking?"

OgdenLover said...

Ogden could have used George Carlin.

"The real owners are the big wealthy business interests that control things and make all the important decisions. Forget the politicians, they're an irrelevancy. The politicians are put there to give you the idea that you have freedom of choice. You don't. You have no choice. You have owners. They own you. They own everything. They own all the important land. They own and control the corporations. They've long since bought and paid for the Senate, the Congress, the statehouses, the city halls. They've got the judges in their back pockets. And they own all the big media companies, so that they control just about all of the news and information you hear. They've got you by the balls. They spend billions of dollars every year lobbying -- lobbying to get what they want. Well, we know what they want; they want more for themselves and less for everybody else."

"But I'll tell you what they don't want," Carlin continued. "They don't want a population of citizens capable of critical thinking. They don't want well-informed, well-educated people capable of critical thinking. They're not interested in that. That doesn't help them. That's against their interests. .... It's a big club, and you ain't in it. You and I are not in the big club."

Anonymous said...

In the article can someone clarify that the $200K in ramp funds already given, and the statement that a pledge for equal amount of money raised by Lowe, has Lowe pledged or the county. Will there be more ramp funds put towards the tower? Who do we go to when expenses exceed the raised funds? Where is the accountability since we are paying for the junction when we were told the taxpayer wouldn't have to pay for the Junction debt? Who is financing all the pro-advertizing? I also ask who these mysterious contributors are, open government means just that.

I am disappointed the vote especially if the social standing of the council member means more than fiduciary accountability.

Paying off the debts would be more desirable for the holdover funds. Pumping more money into the Junction since it doesn't perform as expected seems to have these business owners feeding at the public trough.

I'm thankful that the other 3 council members remember that they serve the citizens interest not elitist special interests. The other 4 council members have turned a blind eye towards what Ogden really needs, better roads, water, sewer, fire and police adequate funding. Those on fixed incomes paying more for water will see a real hardship with gas and groceries going up almost weekly.

Hopefully next election the citizens will remember who voted to continue running Ogden into frivilous debt over questionable projects.

I still don't see any directions for those visiting Ogden coming off the Frontrunner, sad.

OgdenLover said...

That's because we're not a city, we're a playground.

Anonymous said...

I object to one characterization in today's prepubescent pap masquerading as a house editorial in the Gondola-Examiner: "we're a newspaper, after all." No, you're not.

THE SKI IS BEAUTIFUL BLUE

Anonymous said...

OL:
That's because we're not a city, we're a playground.

Nice.

Anonymous said...

Jason:

Glad you brought up today's editorial in the SE --- link here. I notice it includes praise for what the editors see as the Mayor's willingness now to keep the council informed in a timely fashion about city matters.

And yet, just yesterday, the SE reported this:

Richard McConkie, the city’s deputy director of community and economic development, said it was always anticipated that BDO revenues would be used initially to subsidize The Junction’s debt.

This was a surprising revelation by Mr. McConkie, since at the time the Council approved the bond sales for the Junction project, the Mayor assured the Council members, and the public, that the city absolutely would not be on the hook for the bond's principle and interest payments. When he told the Council the City had to make the bonds a public obligation, in order to sell them at a better rate, he again assured the Council that this was a pro forma matter only, and the the City would NOT end up making payments on the bonds.

Has Mr. McConkie just called his boss a liar? If it is true as Mr. McConkie says now that the Administration knew at the time the bonds were approved that the city would have to "initially subsidize" the payments, then he's just told the SE that the Mayor was not being honest with the Council when he pitched the Junction project in the first place.

I wonder if the Pollyanna authors of today's editorial noticed Mr. McConkie's flat contradiction of what he boss told the Council originally, or considered how the fact that [if McConkie is speaking honestly now] the Mayor deliberately disembled in pitching the bonds to the Council will affect chances for future "good communications." The Editorial Board might find it instructive to read its own coverage of the Mayor's statements to the Council, the press and the public when he originally pitched the rec center and Junction project bonding. When they do, I think they'll find it would take a world class contortionist to, somehow, reconcile the Mayor's statements to the Council back then with Mr. McConkie's revelations in the SE yesterday.

Monotreme said...

Personally, I'm more or less agnostic on the ice tower. I think it's a bad idea, but I am willing to admit that I can be wrong sometimes.

However, I am deeply troubled by the process.

Jeff Lowe should have been required to submit a proper business plan, not a couple of hand-typed documents making assertions for which there was no evidence, and then a newspaper ad that repeats those assertions.

Mr. Lowe, an architect's drawing is NOT a business plan. Telling us the ice in Scotland or Burlington, Vermont is inferior is not evidence. Just days ago, you were claiming that yours was the only such ice tower in the world. Now it's not, but the other two are inferior. I submit that an error like this is evidence that you haven't fully thought through this project. By spending 45 minutes with Google, I was able to puncture your claim of uniqueness. What other claims have you made that are similarly unsupported?

You say you've met with engineering, construction and refrigeration consultants. I call "BS". Let's see signed statements from those individuals verifying the feasibility of your project, and validating the proposed construction methods and costs. You managed to get a letter from the Mayor that supported the idea of a "Hollowgraphic" ice tower. If he can't be bothered to learn how to spell it, then why should I assume you have really done the legwork you claim?

In my opinion, the city council, by majority vote, has abdicated their due diligence and handed over that function to whoever can be persuaded to come up with the first $1.4 million. That's sad. Since they won't do it, but I bet the other potential contributors will, I'm asking for this now, Mr. Lowe, because I bet I won't be the last.

I assume that the ad on page 16A of Sunday's paper was paid for by the city administration (under the guise of "Friends of Ogden Climbing Parks".)

If so, then it's an example of one half of the city's government lobbying the other half.

Is it legal to use city funds so that the mayor can lobby the council?

Since I'm not the only curious one, does anyone have a clever way of determining who paid for the ad in Sunday's paper?

Anonymous said...

Monotreme,

I called the Standard-Examiner and asked. The ad in Sunday's paper was paid for by Ogden Climbing Parks, and an ad of that type typically costs about $4200.

Back in the 60s the Sierra Club lost its 501c3 tax status by running lobbying ads like that. However, the IRS makes such decisions based on the totality of an organization's activities, not on a single ad.

Monotreme said...

Well, then, who funds Ogden Climbing Parks?

We know that RAMP funds cannot be used for such purposes. I'm pretty sure I know where the operating budget for OCP comes from, but I'm asking anyway.

Anonymous said...

monotreme:

Lowe has raised money for OCP in various ways, especially through his Climb Fest events this year and last.

Anonymous said...

Just FYI, on a topic that has come up several times lately: from today's NY Times, this piece. Headline: Fuel Prices Shift Math for Life in Far Suburbs . And the lede: Suddenly, the economics of American suburban life are under assault as skyrocketing energy prices inflate the costs of reaching, heating and cooling homes on the distant edges of metropolitan areas.

Anonymous said...

Hey, Mono... were you laboring under the impression that Rep. Canon wanted to win his race for Congress? Afraid not. This from Canon in an on-line story this afternoon in the SE:

SALT LAKE CITY -- U.S. Rep. Chris Cannon said Wednesday he's glad he won't be serving a seventh term in Congress after being blown out in a Republican primary. "I'm actually pretty happy about last night's results," Cannon told The Associated Press after losing to Jason Chaffetz, Gov. Jon Huntsman's former chief of staff.
"I think I'll be able to do many of things I would ordinarily do in Congress on the outside without having to suffer the sort of difficulties that come with that job."


Link here.

You know, it must have been the liberal media that fooled all his campaign workers and contributors into thinking he wanted to stay in Congress. Bad, bad liberal media....

Monotreme said...

Dan:

Thanks. I'm still looking for evidence of feasibility, what you and I would call "proof of principle".

Monotreme said...

Curm:

You think Mayor Godfrey still wants to be Mayor? If he's anything like Chris Cannon, the desire to leave starts with spouting inanity, like "they'll have to release a thief to jail this thief" or "it's just a technical violation" or this.

Anonymous said...

Mono:

Ah, thanks for the link.
Now I'm wondering how minute a fraction of humanity would not fit under the heading of "people who knew more than Cannon did at any given age...."

Anonymous said...

One point has been overlooked.

I was there last night, and spoke along the lines of what Monotreme said above.

Then Lowe hobbled up to the podium and dished up the BS.

He asked me into the hall afterwards. I pointed to his own figures to show how implausible his plans are. He didn't even want to look at them. Why should he? He already knew.

I told my wife that had six people shown up to ask that Lowe be forced to document his claims, the vote would have been different. I was all alone, except for Dorrene, in arguing against it. (Although Wicks and Stephens also voted against the funding.)

Now Godfrey will begin his game to maneuver the council into paying for the whole project with our money. Last night he and Patterson said that this $100,000 will be spent only when the city raises all the funds elsewhere. In my opinion, they were LYING, and the council should have known better.

If a few of you had been there, it would have changed everything. The meeting lasted 30 minutes.

Anonymous said...

I'm not sure who's dilemma is more perplexing. The taxpayers or Lowes?
I believe for the $200,000 ramp funds to be recieved the project, in total must be City owned. We know that this new gift plus the ramp funds hardly scratch the surface of the total construction costs, and the Council holds the purse strings, they could simply refuse any more funding, and the project would never start. How is Lowe supposed to transfer his donations to the City to fund this venture? All his fundinding should be in place with a concrete bid that allows for zero cost over-runs before any dirt is moved. Money up front, including lying little matty's don't work, removal just in case fund.

Anonymous said...

Oh, I forgot, short deck and potato nose were very busy designing their coat and glove rental kiosk last night. Do you have to be connected to gain permits? How far from the structure will they be required to place it, uncle gregory?

Monotreme said...

Well, David, we'll have to agree to disagree.

I have been to council meetings, and I have not seen anything that goes on there that changes people's minds. With all respect to those citizens who take the time to be heard, I have found the demeanor of the council during the "open comment period" to be more one of "this is a necessary evil to be endured".

I did make my feelings known to my representatives on the council via email.

I don't presume to know how individual council members make decisions, but I'm pretty sure it's not based on the open comment period.

Anonymous said...

Monotreme, since you've asked some questionsmade some assertions in a reasonably civilized manner, I'll answer them:

1- I agree, an architect's drawing does not constitute a business plan. The visuals you've seen are only to give an idea of the appearance of the tower, in the location it will be erected. Architectural/construction details are proprietary in nature and won't be made public until we've (OCP) completed our review of the protectabily (if any) of the overall design or design elements.

2- My claim that Ogden's ice tower is the only free-standing, refrigerated tower in the world, is valid. That you are unable to discern the difference between the refrigerated rooms contained within rooms in the interior of larger buildings, only demonstrates your ignorance of the sport and the industry. But I won't hold that ignorance against you. As long as you remain somewhat respectful, I'll try to gradually bring you up to speed.

3- If you'll go to ogdenclimbingparks.com, click on the tower, and then click on the design and construction teams link, you'll see the quality of this effort. Do you think Salerno, LA Roser, C&D, Spectrum, R&O, and Boman-Kemp would be involved if this were not a serious and functional project?

4- Regarding the mayor's supposed misspelling of "holographic", you should lighten up on him, as the spelling he used was provided by me as a tongue-in-cheeck reference to the holographic arts in the original tower design for ESPN. The three-sided tower design creats a "hollow" interior, wherein the ice is hung from the frame on a matrix of chainlink, cable and rebar, in a "graphic" display. The mayor complained from the outset that my obscure reference would be misunderstood. He was right, and he's had to bear the brunt of my ill-advised attempt at cleverness.

5- Over two months ago I offered to appear before the city council to answer these and many other questions that have been raised. Amy Wicks assured me she'd try to arrange it, but never got back to me. Caitlin Gochnor, on the other hand, came to my office and asked questions until she had none left. The process took about an hour. She left my office supportive of the tower, so long as certain constraints were in place on any public funding--and I have no issues at all with such constraints.

6- The ad in the paper was indeed paid for by friends of OCP. Indeed, no one in the administration knew we were placing it. I'll inquire of the "friends" if they will allow their names to be used publicly. I know some of them don't want to become embroiled in conflict with folks like yourself.

7- Dan S is correct, Ogden Climbing Parks is an already operating entity. Our first year of operations (2007), we had income from grants, sponsorships and operations of a little more than 160k, with a profit of over 30k to put back into programs. This year, without the ice tower, we'll do about double that. When the ice tower is erected, we have in place an on-going grant to support programs for school kids and disabled groups.

Once again, go to the website and click on the tower and then "endorsements". There are many more to add, when we get the time.

I do agree, Mono, that partners of OCP will require proof of our plans. As appropriate, they each will and have recieved such evidence. Once our patent/trademark research is complete, we'll post most of the info on the website. Before we do that, however, we need to develop a new site. The current one is based on a template with extremely limited capabilities.

I'll check back from time to time to see if you have other questions. As time permits, I'll answer them, but only if the discourse remains civil.

Your friend and neighbor,

Jeff

Anonymous said...

"As time permits, I'll answer them, but only if the discourse remains civil."

Anonymous said...

Mr. Lowe,

Thanks for your response. Of course I am ignorant of the sport and the industry. After all, I would assume that as someone who is interested and active in the outdoor sports Ogden has to offer, that I'd be part of the target market for the ice tower, if it were built. So, I'd submit that educating me will be good practice for educating others as well.

I have a great deal of respect for what you've been able to accomplish in your chosen field. I'd like to be accorded the same degree of respect in mine. I have read literally hundreds of grant applications and written a few dozen of my own. I think I know how to vet one.

The misspelling of "holographic" as "hollowgraphic" is present in your 2007 RAMP application. The same misspelling, by the way, is found in a Sep 8 2005 John Wright story on the not-yet-seen Via Ferrata in the Standard-Examiner. What about this article or this one? The misspelling persists, even on your own home page. Given these sources, I fail to be convinced by your explanation. There are 56 citations to this misspelling in Google. Are these all examples of a misguided attempt at humor?

Even the height of the tower has been variously reported in the sources above as 80 feet, 70 feet and 50 feet.

I was not clear in that what you claimed earlier was that it was the tallest ice tower in the world. That's what I meant by "only such". I still think that poo-poohing the other facilities by making distinctions such as "only freestanding, refrigerated, year-round ice tower" is a bit disingenious. I can make similar claims for being the only "hairless, bearded, short genius with the initials MTE" but by the time I add that many modifiers, it doesn't add up to much.

In my view, you're still dodging the essential point I was trying to make. Here it is again. You claim that these construction, engineering and refrigeration consultants are on board, but what evidence do we have of this? Exactly what has transpired at these meetings you refer to? Do you have minutes or a record of same that you are willing to share with us?

How are we to interpret the fact that the stated construction costs for the tower have increased, over a period just over a year, from $400,000 (citation: Apr 27 2007 Des News) to $1.5 million? I don't think you can claim a 300% annual inflation rate for construction costs, so the explanation must lie elsewhere.

Finally, I am not sure what you mean by the phrase "embroiled in conflict with folks such as yourself". I am a citizen and taxpayer who is forced to do the due diligence that has been abdicated by City Council and the Mayor. If you think this is hostility, then you are sadly mistaken. I want to be convinced of the feasibility of the ice tower. I want Ogden to succeed. I want all sorts of people to come here for the unique opportunities that Ogden has to offer. I do not want Ogden to continue as a laughingstock for the rest of the Wasatch Front. You misinterpret my lack of shameless boosterism for hostility. It's nothing of the sort.

Anonymous said...

Mono:

Agree on the Council making most of its decisions well before the formal Council meetings open. It would take, I think, the revelation of some truly significant new information [not opinion] to sway a vote at a meeting. Sometimes that happens, but usually it results in the Council postponing action so the information can be looked into. 9 times out of 10, the votes have been decided before they walk into the room, and all of them could probably tell us before the opening gavel falls exactly how the vote will come out.

Anonymous said...

Mr. Lowe,

One more thing regarding the people you claim as partners.

Here's a webpage of current projects from the L.A. Roser Company. Nowhere is the "holographic ice tower" or even the "hollowgraphic ice tower" mentioned. There is no mention of the ice tower on the cdengineers.com web page, on the Pyramide Climbing Walls page, or on the Environmental Performance Group webpage. All we are left with is an architect's drawing, which is where we started.

I find it unconvincing for you to say, "it's a secret until we get our patents filed." You could certainly provide the taxpayers with letters of support from the companies mentioned above.

Anonymous said...

Great scam, Jeff. You're destined I'm sure, to be inducted into the Utah Con Man Hall of Fame.

I'll be a 2009 inductee myself, according to my sources.

Take it from me. There's nothing more satisfying than ripping off your friends and neighbors.

Anonymous said...

Enlightening quote from the Steve A. comment linked above:

"Doug Stephens also voted against it and said that the Council hadn't been given a business plan or an agreement that there were too many unanswered questions."

Once again the majority of the council blindly casts its vote, after having been denied requested and necessary information.

Kudos to councilmen Wicks, Jeske and Stephens the way!

Shame on Garcia, Gochnour, Johnson and Stephensen.

Anonymous said...

i just realized all i have to do to get money from the city of ogden is to put together a so so power point presentation that i post on the www.

doesnt matter whether the financial numbers are any good or that the endorsements are from parties no one knows or that the financial backers are not willing to identify themselves. just as long as it has pretty pictures and a high adventure theme.

godfrey garcia gochnour johnson and stephensen - ill be in touch.

Anonymous said...

Jeff,

Could you please elaborate on that "ongoing grant"? From whom, and from how much annually?

Thanks.

Anonymous said...

What I want to know is did the Council also pass the budget to allocate more money to the Rec Center?

Anonymous said...

Mono:

Thanks for keeping it on the up-and-up.

You may fail to understand the difference between Ogden's ice tower and the existing indoor facilities, but ice climbers do. I will work in the future to elaborate on this, but it's late, and I just want to address a few of your points quickly.

1- That the misspelling is so pervasive, over such a long period of time, is because I was trying to establish a trademark. I can be bull-headed sometimes! But, I've finally seen the error of pushing against this particular rock up the hill.

2- Niether I, nor OCP, have ever claimed the tower to be the world's tallest. Niether I, nor OCP, have ever filed for a RAMP grant for the tower.

3- The exact height of the tower is 66 feet. The exact width of the re-desinged tower is 64 feet corner-to-corner at the base. I MAY have referenced 70' height in some interiew, but never 80'. Those other references would not have been from me, except the 50' height reference could refer to the height of the climbable ice surface.

4- If you want to vet the design team, call Bill Salerno at Salerno Architects, Andy Eversole at LA Roser, Reinhard Ludke at C&D, or Todd Cosby at R&O. You could also call Richard Young at EPG to confirm they've been contracted to do an environmental sustainability baseline analysis, to be followed by operational recommendations to improve the performance of the tower and reduce our carbon footprint.

5- For current programs that are just now being started with disabled groups, call Merri Ann Perkins at the Pioneer Adult Rehabilitation Center, in Clearfield, or John Librett, director of 'Splore, in SLC. We have been training 12 guides under an American Mountain Guides master instructor for the past half-year. We have five guides with their basic certification, now, and seven more in training.

6- The 400k price tag for erecting the tower, was the correct figure for the Big Dee Park location, with the tower configured exactly as it was for the X-Games. Insulating blankets were used to enclose it during ice making, and ice could reasonably be made for only five months each year. In re-configuring the tower, making it architecturally appealing and creating the potential for year-round ice making at the 25th and Keisel location, the price went up. The 1.6M figure is based on actual construction quotes from the various contractors as collected by R&O.

I'm with you, Mono. Ogden deserves a better reputation than it currently enjoys (under mayor Godfrey's administration, though, the city has become very positively viewed in the OR industry). The high adventure theme is excellent, and one where I can help. In the next issues of Rock and Ice and Outside Magazine, Ogden will be recognized as a great mountain town. I have been working to get the word out. Also, our spring and autumn adventure festivals have become instant successes with sponsors, invited guests, and the public.

I'm not perfect, and I've had a failure or two, but I've had many climbing/adventure-related business successes in the last 35 years. People like Kenji Haroutunian (director of the OR show), Duane Raleigh, editor of Rock and Ice, Jim Donini (President of the American Alpine Club), and many other key figures in the industry are willing to vouch for my veracity. They do not do this lightly.

I suggest we get together and talk this thing out over a beer. We can go into much greater depth, and you could improve my grant-writing skills (which, by the way, can't be too bad, since OCP has won 5 of the 6 grants we've applied for in the last 13 months, since we first started the process of applying-still,I would welcome your input). Good idea? Bad idea?

Anonymous said...

Keeping things on the up and up as Jeff Lowe has requested . . .

1. Note Jeff has already taken the city taxpayers for about $100K, about half of which was cash money. He offers to have you talk to people to whom he gave some of this cash like design firms, notes that they will confirm they have taken the city's money, and suggests this shows his "veracity".

2. Note while he claims to have received private funds, he still fails to document any sources of money other than taxpayers.

You can talk to guys like this all day,and they will make you feel more and more confident, just like he did with Caitlin Gochnour, all the while they will produce no actual documentation regarding any sources of money other than the money they are asking for from YOU.

But they're good at it - appearing credible.

That's why they're called, "confidence men."

Think, "documentation," not "claims." Then you will see Jeff Lowe in his true light.

Anonymous said...

Just Wonder; yes the council did vote another bailout for $1.5M for the Rec Center. I don't understand why the citizens allow a rate increase for all of us for water and sewer, while the funds from BDO are used to support a private enterprise instead of repairing and updating the water and sewer. How can we get an independent audit of the Rec Center costs, insider deals,or the Mayors office? With all of the public money going to the Rec Center how much could of been spent to lower our water rates?

Anonymous said...

According to Councilman Stephens, Mr. Lowe and Mayor Godfrey have failed and refused to produce various documents for council inspection, including Lowe's business plan and his operating agreement, which was supposedly entered into with the city.

According to another councilmember I talked with yesterday, Mr. Lowe refuses to make these documents public, claiming they contain "proprietary information."

Although sensitive information within these documents could be "redacted" with a black magic marker, Mr. Lowe would be well advised to remember that it's a government entity he's dealing with as he enters into this "partnership" with Ogden City, and as such, he doesn't enjoy the kind of confidentiality he would enjoy if he were dealing purely in the private sector.

The question is this, Mr. Lowe: Will you voluntarily release for public inspection all documents relating to your "partnership" with Ogden city, including your business plan and operating agreement?

Or will it be necessary for somebody to GRAMA them?

Anonymous said...

The problem with Jeff Lowe-Geiger and his conniving ilk is that their squirrel-hating paws are always dipping into the public trough; if your dumbass frozen dong is such a winner, why doesn't your vaunted 'outdoor recreation' industry finance it, and reap the enormous, Lying-Little-Matty-Gondola-Godfrey-Forehead-esque windfall? You geniuses will be rolling in dough after all that fabulous date night revenue from eager, high-adventure couples looking to scale a refrigerated dildo on an August Wednesday. This is an unholy crock of shit and you know it, Jeff Peterson-Godfrey-Lowe -- but if you want to raise money and build your icy phallus, go right ahead. Problem is, you've already snookered the RAMP Board for $200K, and now the OTown City Council has capitulated to your jackassed scheme. Speaking of Wayne Peterson and his Famed Squirrel Patrol, why don't you disclose your relationship with that high-adventure ahole? What financial stake does Wayne have in your OCP? I suspect you understand that once the public learns our would-be land thief and Thorazine-addled, Patagonia-vest-wearing GONDOLA freak from Sandy is embroiled in your scheme, you'll lose any shred of credibility you're feebly clinging to, Godfreyite. Enhancing our community's reputation within your so-called 'outdoor recreation' industry does not benefit the citizenry at large; you are a niche business segment that is incestuous, self-promoting and self-serving. And don't come around here seeking civility when you introduce this kind of ridiculous horseshit into the public arena. You begged for our money and you got it, so now you have to answer for your hat-in-hand, slovenly pandering for your moronic ice wang.

THE SKI IS BEAUTIFUL BLUE

OgdenLover said...

If neither Jeff Lowe nor OCP applied for RAMP funding (see item #2 in his latest post), how did that money accidentally fall into Jeff's pockets and why is there a RAMP logo on the artist's rendition of the tower?

Jeff, you mention Caitlin Gochnour's informational meeting with you but fail to address whether or not she is a close friend of your sister. If so, she probably should have recused herself from last Tuesday night's vote.

Anonymous said...

Ogdenlover,

Lowe got $200,000 RAMP money last year to put his popsicle in Big D Park, which the ninny consistently refers to as "Big Dee" park in his documents. Another example of the fact that his spelling skills are not equal to his conning skills.

He asked for another $200,000 RAMP money this year that was denied. We wonder why he needed it with all his fund raising. Or could it be he's been lying about that? We don't know, because he doesn't show anyone, not even Dr. Gochnour, who doesn't need to see documentation, apparently.

Lowe immediately set to spending the first $200,000, but the RAMP committee said, No, so the money Lowe spent will have to come from Godfrey and guess who . . .

Speaking of Gochnour, she now adds nepotism to the list of corrupt adjectives that can be applied to Ogden City government. Hey, can I be your friend too? I need the money.

GreenLobbyist said...

The only concern I would like to voice at this time is the lack of action. It appears that many of the comments made on this board come from people who don't attend council meetings or make their opinions heard anywhere but this public forum. These same people are only willing to make harsh comments about a situation that they only vaguely understand by using an alias.
I challenge everyone who reads this to do their own research and present it to the council. Poke holes where you see inconsistencies and provide actual evidence. You are no different than Lowe in that you are all talk and no action.
Granted, there are a few people here that take action, hats off to you for doing so. Keep up the good work. For all of you others, get off your butts and do something. Talk is cheap.
Oh, and for all of you that are asking what I am doing... I am taking action.

Anonymous said...

Dan S:

If you'll come to my office, I'll show you the documentation regarding the ongoing grant. However, it's from a foundation that wishes to remain annonymous, so I won't reveal the name.

Althepal:

I realize that dealing in the not-for-profit and public sector requires more openness. Why do you think I'm posting here? It's not exactly fun dealing with people who have formed an opinion of you and your motives that is as low as some here seem to have of me. When Caitlin Gochnour (sp?) came to my office, I did produce the documents she requested, so she was able to vet the tower plans. And I have never refused to reveal anything to the council. As I continue to state, Amy Wicks failed to take me up on my offer to appear before the council and answer any questions they may have. At no time did any council member ask me for a business plan--or any other document, for that matter.

Jason w:

Chris Peterson has not put a single dime into OCP. I wouldn't refuse his help, though; at one point he did show some interest in our programs for people with disabilities. But he hasn't followed up with that as of this date.

I get the point that you feel the entire Outdoor Industry is worthless, as are all the participants and players. It's my opinion that your attitude is harmful to Ogden's future, but you're welcome to your opinions, too.

You really do have a convincing way with words, though, and a logic that some might find quite infallible. Just joking...you know I think you're as full of it as you think I am.

Rudi:

You'll probably read this. Are you the old family friend that dated my sister and went to school with my brother--the guy I used to ski with occasionally--back in the 60's. Just curious. I like to know who I'm dealing with, and it's always good to re-establish old friendships.

Karl said...

Democrats

If it moves, Tax it.
If it keeps moving, Regulate it.
If it stops moving, Supsidise it.



Republicans

If it moves, subsidise it.
If it keeps moving, give it a tax break.
If it stops moving, blame the Democrats.

Anonymous said...

Translation of Jeff Lowe's post above:

Dan S.
Come to my office and I'll show you a piece of paper with some writing on it that you can't verify because the single piece of key information will be missing.

Althepal:
The council memebers who say they have asked for information and that I have not provided any are all liars.

Rudi:
Let me see if I can form some ancient tie to you so you will feel sorry for me and get off my back.

To the rest of you:
Just close your eyes, and BELIEVE!

Anonymous said...

Ciitzen wrote: Speaking of Gochnour, she now adds nepotism to the list of corrupt adjectives that can be applied to Ogden City government.

Sorry, but a Councilwoman having a friend who is the sister of someone doing business with the city does not constitute "nepotism" by any reasonable definition of that term.

And in the midst of all this heaping of abuse on Council members who did not vote as we would have liked [and I would have preferred that Ms. G and Mr. G had voted "nay"], we ought to keep in mind a couple of things:

1. The Mayor's request was for $200K in city subsidy. He did not get it. He got half what he requested. The Council majority may have reached a decision we wish it had not, but it did not roll over and play dead on this one. It cut the requested subsidy in half, and that, as they used to say in the Brooklyn of my yout', ain't chopped liver.

2. As I recall, Mr. Garcia, supported by other members, got in a provision that the subsidy could not be spent until Mr. Lowe had independently raised the money necessary to complete the project. This was, I think, an important thing to add to the grant, and is a further indication that the Council did not meekly roll over on this one.

As for Councilwoman Gouchnor's vote: we ought to remember that when we election Council members, we are not electing to parrot our wishes on every matter that may arise over their terms in office. We are electing them to exercise their best judgment on every matter that arises over their terms. It would be highly unreasonable for me to expect Ms. Gouchnor or any other member to vote as I would on every issue [though, of course, they would be very wise to do so].

Ms. G. seems to have done her job. She gathered information, she interviewed and questioned the applicant, she raised questions at work sessions, she refused to support the $200K request, she supported Councilman G's adding restrictions on spending. I preferred Mr. Stephens stand [that the city's financial obligations to the project were not nearly well enough delineated and explained for him to vote "yea" at this point], and I wish G. had voted with him on this. But I cannot accuse her of failing to do her job or of somehow being corrupt because she has a friend who is the sister of an applicant for a subsidy.

Anonymous said...

Mr. Lowe:

Just want to remind you again, of what I think is one of the main sources of the opposition to the grant you are getting from the city, and the anger it has generated: we have been burned before by the Administration on matters very like this one. The Mayor's MO on big projects is to lowball the cost estimates until they are approved, and then ramp up the costs to the taxpayers.

He did it with the bonds for the Junction project, assuring the Council that the city absolutely would not be responsible for paying those bonds off. At the session Tuesday, the city Council had to approve hundreds of thousands of dollars to make bond payments. [And now we learn from Mr. McConkie that the Administration knew the city would have to pay all along, even as the Mayor was denying it to the Council.]

He did it again with the flatland gondola, winning the SE editors' support by assuring them it would all be built with private money. Within months, that had been revised and he conceded that millions of public funds would have to go into the project too.

And now your project, which will of necessity be owned by the city. He now assures us this request will be the last trip to the well, that the City will not have to pony up more for either construction of operating expenses. [Mr. McConkie has not yet spoken about what the Administration knows that may be different from what it is saying publicly, but you can hardly blame us for wondering about that.]

Hence the concern that we are not being given the whole truth about this project too. There's a history here, and not an encouraging one, of the Administration running low-ball bait and switch operations to secure funding for major public projects. That underlies, I think, and reasonably underlies, much of the opposition, and some of the anger, you are running into.

This isn't simply your project, Mr. Lowe. It is also the Mayor's project, and as we now know, his word is no good.

Anonymous said...

Curmudgeon:

You are the voice of reason on this forum. I welcome your comments. Monotreme is reasonable, too, as is Dan S. But most of you seem to be conflating myself and OCP with the administration. We are not one -and-the-same. Although I welcome the mayor's interest and support of the OCP agenda (the whole agenda, not just the tower), there is a clear, arms-length relationship. Perhaps Amy Wicks did not percieve the importance of this when she failed to follow up on my offer to answer council questions directly.

On this forum the conflation of OCP and the City has been persistent, and consistently wrong. In fact OCP has never filed for a RAMP grant for the tower. If we did, we wouldn't recieve it, because RAMP cannot fund private building projects. Ogden City applied for and recieved RAMP funding. Ogden City recieved the money and has cvontrol of the funds. OCP has no control of these funds. In the same manner, all other construction funds for the tower that Ogden City applies for and recieves, will be controlled by the City. The concept is that the City will own the building, and OCP will lease it and operate it.

Likewise, it has been inferred on this site, that I work for the City and the city pays me. This is not true. Many other untrue "facts" continue to be bandied about in this cyber-melee. These are "facts" of which I have direct knowledge to the contrary. Since this is my experience, how am I to trust any of the other "facts" that are promulgated here? I have witnessed directly the tendency of Weber County Forum to take a silk purse and reassemble it into a sow's ear.

Thanks for listenning.

Anonymous said...

Jeff Lowe,

You told me after the council vote you planned to take a city job as executive director of the ice tower.

Arms length, huh?

Anonymous said...

Sorry but most readers of WCF assume that to get the Mayor behind an idea you have to be a FOM. Case in point, Binghams, Pelton's on the river, were approved to serve food and alcohol where the Motel across was denied, even when the owners were assured there would be no problem in the remodel and permits. Terra Vente has built new homes across from the Ivy Reception center on 25th that share a driveway, and minimum set backs were not up to code that if an owner wanted to do the planning department wouldn't let them.

The WFC readers are very leery when a project using public funds have cost over runs, shoddy construction, and no bid contracts awarded without the city council approval or knowledge. Most come out of the administaration as after the fact. We have been told of new construction and re-models that seem to disappear, and without real proof, data and mystery investors that can't be named rises the suspecion level of the concerned citizens. I still don't see an an accurate figue on Junction costs and breakdowns. Did the city buy all the equipment for Gold's Gym, I-Fly and the wave runner?

On the ice tower we still have no data on laiablity, business plan, investors named. If the city is giving away the corner property, that alone is worth $200K, then there is more being given away, while our water rates increase, taxes increase, and services are cut to pay for projects that may or may not attract enough people to sustain them.

Look at the police department, fire engines that are worn out, I don't see any new equipment in the budget, but department heads can drive Escalades.

Anonymous said...

David S:

That's not correct. I did not say I planned to take a city job as director of the tower. I told you I would serve as executive director of the ice tower. Operational management of the tower will be the resposibility of OCP. OCP is not Ogden City. I work for OCP. OCP pays my salary. My current position is executive director, and I'm sure I will retain that position when OCP takes over operation of the tower. As I've said earlier and elsewhere, OCP is funded by a combination of profits from programs and festivals, sponsorships of events, grants and private donations.

Anonymous said...

Curious 1:

The site for the tower is Key Bank land. My understanding is that Key Bank--who likes the tower project and is supportive of it--is making it available to the city at a nominal cost, but I don't know the exact terms of the deal.

Anonymous said...

Mr. Lowe, you stated in one of your posts above that: “Partners of OCP will require proof of our plans. As appropriate, they each will and have recieved such evidence.” Why is it then that several Council members say that they have not received the documents that they requested? Do you think that anyone would be successful in attempts to get them to lie about that? Which leaves us to conclude one of two things: 1) Either you or the Mayor/Administration is not telling them the truth, or 2) You both are being deceitful. (I just hate the word “lying” especially to accuse someone of “lying” because it is such a nasty action word.) Because of the Administration’s past history, I am inclined to think that it is they who have been the instigators in this deception You also stated: “At no time did any council member ask me for a business plan--or any other document, for that matter.” Could the reason for that be that they went through the proper channels of communication and requested that information from the Administration through their executive director. There is a correct way of doing things in city government. But, I also believe that you were not forthcoming with any documents to the Council, and you could not have been unaware that they had requested them with all the publicity this issue has created.


You also stated: “I's not exactly fun dealing with people who have formed an opinion of you and your motives that is as low as some here seem to have of me.” Mr. Lowe, I respected you, even though I don’t know you, for what you have accomplished in the climbing world and your family name, but I find it hard to continue to have that respect for you when you apparently don’t afford others respect simply because they question the Mayor’s portrayal of and his approach to obtaining public money for a private venture. You degraded people you didn’t know because they disagreed with the proposal It’s very sad that you have portrayed yourself to be a small person (not physically because of your many climbing feats) but your nature. Remember you are judged as you judge others.

I have not opposed your ice climbing tower, but I have some environmental concerns, and I am concerned that the administration has hoodwinked the Council into a very expensive operation for the City, but that does not reflect on you. It is not your fault that you are not dealing with an honest and trustworthy administration. My suggestion is that you do not stoop to their level in dealing with the citizens of Ogden.

Anonymous said...

Holy moley, Jeff.

You're not going to take a government job, but rather a quasi-government job? And that's a big difference?

And you work for OCP? And I suppose Val Southwick worked for Vescor? Can you say "one and the same"?

OCP IS YOU!!!

And when you list all your funding sources, you cannot document any of them! (All wish to remain anonymous, don't you know.) Also, you don't even list Ogden City as a funding source, even though you have taken their money in the past!

Sheesh. People buy this stuff from you? You've made a living selling this crap?

Anonymous said...

Wants integrity:

I have not dissed anyone on this forum for their opinion. I have once or twice risen to the bait of a particularly negative and personal post, such as Jason w's. But I am showing respect by being here. I hope to re-earn your respect, as well.

I share your environmental concerns, too. That is why OCP has contracted with the Environmental Performance Group to vet the sustainability of our plans, and help us improve them. EPG is currently engaged in completing extensive data that will help them in their assesment. When they come back with their recommendations to improve our plans, we will make the adjustments required to be the best environmental stewards we can be. EPG is well-respected. They just completed a similar review of Black Diamond. Black Diamond is a leader in the Outdoor industry on environmental issues.

Once all such internal vetting of our plans is complete, and we have filed the necessary papers for patent and or trademark protections, if any, I will publish the plan to a new OCP website. This may take several months.

Citizen:

OCP is not an arm of any government, nor is it "quasi-governmental". There is a huge difference between being employed by the government, and being employed by a private-sector non-profit.

Yes, I founded OCP, and I'm proud of the work we've begun. We have a fine board of directors, a good core staff of five, with 12 guides certified or in training and dozens of event volunteers. We are open to constructive input from anyone. We are committed to following IRS guidelines to retain our 501(c)(3) status(on this point I want to thank Dan S for his input on lobbying government officials--we will avoid any actyivity that even smacks of that).

Anonymous said...

Jeffles,

What, a dozen requests directed at you from people today, and as many more from city council, and you put out a dozen posts and STILL you don't tell . . .

Where's the money you say you have??? Documented, real . . .

MONEY. You know, the stuff you keep hitting the government for. You don't have any, DO YOU?

Wow, you must really be used to conning dumb people.

RudiZink said...

If Jeff L. wants to come clean, and "bond" with the lumpencitizens of his own home town, we'd suggest he submit for public inspection ALL pertinent documents, including his business plan, operative agreements with the mayor's office and any and all other documents which pertain to Jeff's involvement in this "OCP/Godfrey partnership" straight to Weber County Forum.

The invitation is open.

Submit the documents, and we'll post them right here on this blog.

And to Jeff L. we specifically say this: Show us you're still one of us. Jeff. You can do that by bypassing Boss Godfrey and revealing to us just exactly what arrangements you've made with the Ogden City administration.

Show your olde-tyme homeboy friends (I include myself as one of them) and neighbors... the details of your arrangements with the little twerp (Godfrey.)

You can submit this material here:

rudizink@comcast.net

Anonymous said...

Rudi:

Just let me add that had Mayor Godfrey, over the past eight years, by his performance in office proven himself to be trustworthy, and committed to open government as a matter of principle, and a willing responder to Council questions and requests for information, and a public man whose word was good when given, I suspect few now would be making these requests to Mr. Lowe to provide all this documentation.

Sad, in a way. Really sad.

Anonymous said...

Here's a document, Rudi.

June 26, 2008 1:07 PM Jeff Lowe said this: In fact OCP has never filed for a RAMP grant for the tower.

June 26, 2008 1:32 AM Jeff Lowe said this: In fact OCP has never filed for a RAMP grant for the tower.

Now read this:

OGDEN’S HOLLOWGRAPHIC ICE TOWER, Inc.

January 28, 2007

RAMP Tax Commission Board

Dear RAMP Board Members:

Children love to climb, it’s a natural instinct. When they climb, they develop their muscles, their balance, their flexibility and their brains. It takes a creative mind for a toddler to place a footstool on a stack of newspapers, pull herself up high enough to flop over onto the counter, then reach high on tippy-toe to grab the cookie jar off the top of the fridge! As they grow older, many people never lose the urge to climb and explore. Technical mountain climbing is just a more sophisticated and codified expression of that ancient urge.

I’m an Ogden native and have been a mountain climber ever since my dad guided me up the Grand Teton at the age of seven, back in 1958. Over the years I’ve worked as an instructor for Outward Bound, guided climbers around the world and run my own climbing school, among other things. I’ve witnessed the metamorphosis of a forty-year old housewife into an avid tiger of the heights. I’ve seen inner city dope fiends kick drugs in favor of climbing rocks, and I’ve seen the joy on the faces of kids of all stripes when they finally make it to the top of a climbing wall. The climbing experience offers something that’s very hard to get in today’s society, infatuated as it is with video games and reality TV; almost divorced from or afraid of the natural world and real challenge.

I was very glad to hear from Ogden’s mayor, Mathew Godfrey, that you are graciously willing to consider our request for a grant of $200,000 to help construct an ice climbing facility in the Big Dee Sports Park, In Ogden. Ogden’s Hollowgraphic Ice Tower is unique in that it is the world’s only free-standing, refrigerated ice climbing structure.

I originally designed the tower to be used by the TV sports giant ESPN, as the ice climbing venue for the Winter X Games. It was used for the X Games for several years until ice climbing was dropped from the roster of sports. Last fall I negotiated with Alpine Iron Works, the owner of the tower, to purchase it at a greatly reduced price. Although the tower originally cost $245,000 just for fabrication, the owner is making an in-kind donation of $215,000 of that value (this is exclusive of the cost of erecting the tower).

We have transported the tower in pieces from Crested Butte, Colorado, where it was last used, to Ogden. We have secured a lease on the site at Big Dee Park, from the City, and we are currently working on a slight re-design to make it a better teaching and learning facility, while maintaining the ability to host high-end competitions. This facility will be used by local and visiting climbers. Courses and special programs will be run for kids and adults with special needs. Competitions and festivals will be hosted with far-reaching publicity for Ogden. The community in general will benefit from having a “Tower of Dreams”, unlike any other venue, a place where they can personally experience the truth of this line from French writer, Rene Daumal: “What is above, knows what is down below. But what is below, does not know what is above.”

Thank you for your kind consideration.

Sincerely Yours,



Jeff Lowe
Executive Director
Ogden’s Hollowgraphic Ice Tower, Inc.
dba Ogden Climbing Parks
PO Box 693
Ogden, UT 84402

Tel: (801) 399-1130
jeplowe@netscape.com

Anonymous said...

Jeff. please clear something up for us. You have just stated that the City is responsible for all construction and will be the owner of this icecicle, the grants you're recieving are for providing special treatment and programs for a specific sector of the population,(a small one locally), you had peviously state that these grants will be used to fund your operation. Who is gonna pay for the actual construction of this thing? Sounds like Ogden City, and they can recoup the cost thru your lease agreement, is this correct?

Anonymous said...

Rudi:

Good to hear from you. As I stated above, I'll release all the information on a new OCP website, within 3 months. As wide as the readership of your forum seems to be, it represents only a small fraction of the local population. Also, I prefer to present my own case, not filtered through you. No offence intended.

Danny:

That letter was part of a grant application submitted by Ogden City, to RAMP. As the proposed operator of the tower, it was appropriate to include it in the application. OCP has never submitted an application to RAMP for funds for the ice tower. We wouldn't be awarded the grant, if we did.

Bill C:

No, that's not correct. Jointly, Ogden City and Ogden Climbing Parks are seeking funds to construct the tower. These funds are held and controlled by Ogden City. I have no control over them. This includes RAMP money, and the restricted funds authorised by the council. I repeat: these funds are not held by me or controlled by me, nor are they held or controlled by OCP. I will do my best, however, to aid the City in securing funds to cover the cost of construction, and I will direct any funds tagged for construction to be paid to the City--not passed through OCP--with the stipulation that they be used only for construction of the tower, and nothing else. Tuesday's vote authorizes city funds to be put in last, once the rest of the funds needed are secured. I think this is a very good way to approach the issue, and I agree completely with it.

On the other hand, OCP funds for operations, will be raised entirely by OCP and controlled by OCP. As I've said before, these funds are a combination of profits from operations, sponsorships and grants. These sources will be released in a complete and holistic fashion, on the new OCP website within 3 months.

OgdenLover said...

If the Ice Tower becomes operational, who will pay the bill for insurance or pay claims for any injuries and lawsuits? If the City owns it, then I suspect the answer is "we taxpayers".

Anonymous said...

Ogdenlover:

Good question, but wrong conclusion. OCP has a liability policy in place, underwritten by Loyds of London. The policy actually amounts to a quality and liability control program, since it stipulates the waivers required, instrucion by AMGA-certified guides, etc. Ogden City will be named on the policy, and indemnified.

Anonymous said...

"Profits from operations..." As Good Old (?) Curmudgeon might intone, hoot and a half! You, good and fine sir -- and my ad hominem attacks are aimed squarely at your stupid-ass idea and your dumbass affiliation with Lying Little Matty Gondola Godfrey and his Geigerian horde of brainless high-adventure idiots who swoon at his feet (not a great distance to travel, mind you) and gaze admiringly at his enormous Divining Rod Forehead, not you; I'm sure you're an exceptionally bright fellow and a great guy -- need to remember what you're proposing: a frozen dong edifice that can be climbed year-round that costs $35K a month to freeze. You are not offering a youth activity center or a skate park, or a reasonable facility with some potential for use. Rather, you are promoting a joke, however well-intended it may be. But I apologize for giving you so much shit, since you are a stand-up fellow who faces the fire without resorting to my childish tactics. Therefore, if you ever manage to con the people and foundations of Ogden out of $1.6 million to erect your ice dildo, I will buy you any quantity of any brand of beer you choose, and I'll raise my glass to you and yours.

THE SKI IS BEAUTIFUL BLUE

Anonymous said...

Jeff,

So . . .

It takes you three months to scan some docs huh?

Godfrey's gonna come up with the dough, not you. You ain't gonna come up with diddly, except the cash for your alter ego, OCP. But oh yeah, OCP WILL cover the insurance.

Okay, got it.

It's a new cover story every time, ain't it, Jeff? But at least you're on the record now.

BTW, I'd say your letter (that Danny posted) makes you a little closer than arm's length, no? And you already having the insurance in place with Lloyds for a structure that does not exist is real nice of ya. We'all appreciate it.

I think most con men keep a notebook. Makes keepin' track of who you told what easier. Think about it.

Anonymous said...

Oh, and Jason, you say Lowe is a stand up guy for facing the fire.

Sure enough, he seems to have "brass ones". But remember, this guy has made book off hitting people up for money his whole life to pay him to climb rocks. Since he can't do that no more, this icicle is, well, pretty much the last meal ticket for him.

He's fighting for his bread and butter here. You know, don't get between a dog and his meat. Maybe you're actually the brave one.

Anonymous said...

Dear Mr. Lowe, in the future, please refrain from the geigerly attempts to cast Amy Wicks in any negative light. She's where she is for a reason, that being , she's one of the most thorough, competent Council Members the people of Ogden have ever had serve them. You cannot buffalo her or baffle her with bullshit, ask lying little matty.
The reason you never tied up one of their work sessions is rather obvious from your own statements. You have nothing concrete to show or tell them at this time. The last thing this Council needs or desires, is to spend an evening being bullshitted, lied to and treated like their buying a used car, go to any work session that lying little matty is presenting a new idea, but I digress.
If and when you have your stuff in order, you'll get your chance, but until then, if you want any respect from this crowd, refrain from your idiotic geigerian attempts to cast our Council Chair in a negative light.
P.S. lying little matty escaped with a narrow victory, Amy kicked ass, check the margins.

Anonymous said...

Postscript: In honor of my new favorite rapper, Shaq Diesel:

"Oh, Lowe, tell me how Godfrey's ass tastes."

THE SKI IS BEAUTIFUL BLUE

Anonymous said...

Jeff I,

Two questions please. If Ogden City is going to own the Ice Tower and OCP is going to operate the facility, please let me know what happens if the construction cost of the facility is more than you have budgeted for? In other words who pays the added cost if rather than $1.6 million the project cost $2.6 million dollars?

The second question, how much money does OCP plan to have in reserve for start up costs to cover the negitive cash flow on the front end until the project starts performing per your proforma and also how much money will be in reserve to take it down should the project not succeed?

Anonymous said...

ogden resident:
Respectfully, I hope these questions are rhetorical. Sadly, I think we all know the answer to your questions.

Who wants to bet dinner at Market Street Grill that within one year of its official opening, the Popsicle will receive $250k+ in bailout funding just like the Jackass Center? I'm serious.

(But we don't know for sure it's even going to be built? Yes, we do. The rich and powerful [and/or FOM] pull the strings and get whatever they want, eventually. Look at the Super WallyWorld in Centerville or any of Godfrey's moronic ideas for example.)

So.. who's up for dinner at Market Street? I've only been there once several years ago, and would love to visit again.

Anonymous said...

Oh, and one more thing.. Yesterday as I was getting ready to leave for work, I noticed Ogden City employees doing weedwacking on one of Lesham's properties. Gee.. I wonder if the Yard Nazis(tm) followed through on the threats they usually issue with their citations and are charging Lesham hourly for the time city employees are spending working on that?

Yeaaaaaaaahh.. right.

Anonymous said...

Na-a-h. Ogden's administraion wouldn't charge a FOM a code fine or bill Leshem for the time Ogden City employees weed-whacked and cut lawns on his properties. I heard Jeske ask Patterson in a Council meeting if the City could see that Leshem had his properties cleaned up, and Patterson assured her that they were taking care of it. Now we know how!

Anonymous said...

ogdenlover:

We have our insurance in place because we've begun our programs. The ice tower will be a very important part of OCP activities, but only about 40%, budget-wise.

Jason w:

I'm starting to like you...in spite of my instincts of self-preservation. I'll take you up on those beers, but only if you'll buy them again after the first year of operations, which must be profitable. In the meantime, I'll buy you a beer anytime you want to have a little face time.

Citizen:

No one ever paid me to climb. I did get paid to design gear and clothing, consult on PR and marketing concerns, write books and articles, direct catalog production, guide climbers, appear in and produce movies and videos, design and produce events and so on. Never much, but enough to survive on.

Bill C:

I respect and like Amy, too. But I don't understand her refusal to let me provide info to the council. Appearing before the council is a much heavier gravity situation than standing as an easy target on WCF. I would either produce the requested documentation on the spot for the council, or come back later with it if it was something not anticipated. If you don't like to hear the truth, that's your problem, not mine. I know Amy will be truthful. Ask her if I didn't ask her to set up an appearance before the council, back in March. Of course, I can probably document the exact call on my phone bill, but with Amy, I know that probably won't be necessary. She's a big girl, and probably doesn't need or particularly want your big-brother protection.

ogdenresident:

Good questions. I have not done the budgeting for construction. That has been the responsibility of the city. I have, however, been privy to the entire design and bidding process, and I'm completely satisfied with the expertise, depth of review and care of the city employees who have overseen the process. My understanding is that the bids are fairly well constrained unless there are large change orders, which there will not be, as we've gone through the design details with a fine-toothed comb several times, and we'll do so again before construction begins.

Regarding operational costs: our business model is different than the typical start-up offering retail products and services. Because we have sponsorships in place from day one, and grants for key programs, the curve is much shorter. We will be profitable in our first year of operations. It's the particular mix of revenues, and how we will develop them and use them that may be part of the proprietary information that may be protectable in copyright or as part of a use patent. I don't know for sure. That's what our legal counsel is exploring.

Drew:

I will take you up on that bet, but I'd rather you bought dinner at Rooster's or the Union Grill

In any case, I've spent too much time on this forum the last couple of days. I really have to get back to work. Look for all the info you can digest, on the new OCP website, within a few months.

Anonymous said...

According to Mr. Lowe (as in low down on Godfrey) he claims that Key Bank is behind the project and is selling their land cheap. If Key Bank is behind the project, let them finance it. I'm sorry Mr. Lowe, I don't know you from Adam and can only make a judgement about you from what I have read in the newspaper and on this blog, but I have to agree with Jason W. Your idea sucks. It's got to be the most ridiculous thing that I have ever heard of. I assure you, that if you had to put up the money yourself, you wouldn't. You know damn well this project isn't going to work and the only one(s) that is/are going to benefit from this are you and Godfrey. R and O construction will get the contract to build this POS and Godfrey will get his kick back and you will pocket as much money as you can and run like hell just like Nelson and the boys who own Fat Cats. I would love to see someone step up to the plate and put their money where their mouth is like a lot of other small business owners who have and continue to do so everyday by running their own businesses without the help of the city. It takes someone with a lot of sack to go out on their own and run their own business and put their own time and money, especially money, into what they believe in instead of taking the money of hard working tax payers for some bull shit idea.

Keep your head up your ass, maybe one day you will find the very dildo that Jason W refers too. Maybe you can take those beers that Jason W is offering to buy you and freeze them for your ice cube, then I guarantee you, you will get business. Hell, I'd come climb the cube if I could get drunk while I did it.

BTW Jason W rules!!! Keep it up!!!! Hey, Curm why do you feel like you need to justify everything? Somewhere above you try to explain to Jeff L why he's being attacked. Even though I think that you need to talk to Jeff like he's a 4 year old, due to his one track mind, even he should be able to understand why he's being attacked.

One more thing Jeff L. Just because you take the profits from your supposed non-profit organization and use them to line your own pockets and write them down as an expense doesn't make you truely non-profit. You're making an ass load of money and using your non-profit organization as a means to not pay taxes on it just makes my opinion of you that much lower. You're no better than these organizations that claim that they're non-profit and get people to donate money to feed the starving people in other countries.

If you truely want to help Ogden, find something that will appeal to a majority of Ogdenites not just a select few.

Anonymous said...

My sense is that the non-profit status is so that this project can get the lowest of all possible electrical rates. Municipalities, churches and schools pay about half of what you and I pay for electricity. This thing could never pull a profit as a private entity. Electric rates are in for some major changes. Notice how they have not doubled like other energy sources have recently. That time is coming.

Anonymous said...

OgdenLover you posted, “That's because we're not a city, we're a playground.” You are so right! And the biggest kid is Godfrey! He proved it from day one that he was too young and immature to be the Mayor. Now he’s built a playground unto himself at Ogden taxpayers’ expense. At the Council meeting last Tuesday, when Councilwoman Jeske said that she felt that the funds he wanted to bring “Outdoor Recreation” businesses to Ogden should be offered to all small businesses, NOT just Outdoor Recreation” businesses, she also stated that the biggest complaint that she heard was that there was no reason to go downtown, because there were no shops and stores to go shopping in – just restaurants and games. The Mayor with that big goofy smile shook his head and said, “That’s right!” How stupid is that!? Who in there right mind would want a downtown with just restaurants and games!?

Anonymous said...

Mr. Lowe in your reply to me you said that you had not “dissed” anyone in your posts above. I disagree. You were very condescending to Monotreme when you wrote: “Monotreme, My claim that Ogden's ice tower is the only free-standing, refrigerated tower in the world, is valid. That you are unable to discern the difference between the refrigerated rooms contained within rooms in the interior of larger buildings, only demonstrates your ignorance of the sport and the industry. But I won't hold that ignorance against you. As long as you remain somewhat respectful, I'll try to gradually bring you up to speed.” And “I'll check back from time to time to see if you have other questions. As time permits, I'll answer them, but only if the discourse remains civil.” Monotreme is an extremely intelligent individual and belongs to a very noble profession. To talk to him as you did IS disrespectful.
Mr. Lowe, as I read Monotreme’s posts at no time was he disrespectful, rude or punitive. Just because he believes differently than you and asked for answers to his concerns doesn’t give you the right to insult him with a remark like: “ I know some of them don't want to become embroiled in conflict with folks like yourself.” Yet at the first of your post to Monotreme you stated: “Monotreme, since you've asked some questions made some assertions in a reasonably civilized manner, I'll answer them:”
There were others, but some of them deserved the reply you gave because they were rude and crude.

OgdenLover said...

While Jeff says there will be no construction change orders, he also has said here
"I share your environmental concerns, too. That is why OCP has contracted with the Environmental Performance Group to vet the sustainability of our plans, and help us improve them. EPG is currently engaged in completing extensive data that will help them in their assesment. When they come back with their recommendations to improve our plans, we will make the adjustments required to be the best environmental stewards we can be. E"

That could easily involve change orders. I see that Jeff says has gone off to do other things, but I will raise this point nonetheless. When I was in grad school I had to have my facts straight. Any BS and I was called on it. I can't believe the business community isn't the same. At least not the REAL business community.

Anonymous said...

Jeff L,

I appeciate you effort to respond to my questions. That said though, I do not get a warm and fussy feeling knowing that the city is doing the construction and is responsible for the cost estimates. I have yet to see the city complete a project on budget or without change orders. Your response has validated my concern that we residents will be responsible for any cost over runs on the project. I find this disappointing.
On my second question I'm not sure that you answered the first part entirely and I didn't see any response to the second part.
I know that start up costs are real, every thing from putting the insurance policies in place to paying the deposits on utilities. Not to mention the employee compensation, permit fees and advertising. You must have some idea as to what you need for these requirements, don't you?
The other part of the question addressed the reserve that you indicated that you would set aside to take the facility down if it did not succeed. How much are you setting aside for this possibility?

Anonymous said...

Jeff, in a good faith manuver to the folks in Ogden that have been fed constantly with disengenuous double speak regarding the icecicle, why don't you guarantee, pledge, that nowhere in any documented agreements will Ogden have to pay any patent or trademark fees? They are actually the ones financing this whole endevor. In fact the City itself should recieve some share of any future revenues that possibly come about.

Anonymous said...

OK, there are some good questions in the last couple of posts. I'll answer them, and then maybe we should let this thread expire under its' own weight.

ogdenlover:

If EPG recommendations require additional money to effect, OCP will perform the work at its' own cost, probably after taking possession of the tower. The lease with the City will stipulate that, and also notification/approval before modifications are made. I don't think we'll have trouble getting approval for environmentally sound modifications.

ogden resident:

Many of the start-up costs for OCP have already been covered. Those that are specific to the ice tower are included in the proformas. In my last meeting with the city on the matter, I agreed to a $30,000 annual lease fee. This fee will be agregated and held as a removal bond, by the City.

Bill C:

I pledge that there is no document, and will be no document, demanding a patent or trademark fee. But, you have a good idea. If Ogden would cover the costs of patent and trademark work (including my time), and agree to police the patents or trademarks, I would be happy to split any royalties with the city, after being paid a professional fee for my time. There may be some reason or reasons the city could not make such an agreement, but I'll bring it up with the lawyers. There is already one other city that has shown some interest. Once our tower is up, there will be others.
This could be a way to bring the citizens together on the tower project. At least I'll explore all the ramifications.

Anonymous said...

Jeff L,

I thank you for your effort to respond to my questions but frankly I don't feel that you specifically addressed any of my questions. I was looking for specific dollar amounts and you pretty much just responded with indications that you've got these costs covered. A very similar response we'd get from the city administration. I'm pretty disappointed and concerned that you're really just shooting from the hip. You haven't convinced me that you know what you're doing or that this project isn't going to cost the residents a lot more money that you are indicating.

Anonymous said...

Jeff, you seem to have mis interpreted what I was asking about reguarding the potential patent/ royalty fees. Typical of all lying little matty's business buddies, you show an expectation and willingness to put burden and work on the taxpayer, for something you will benefit from.
What I was suggesting is that no extra tax payer dollars be allowed to be funnelled to you through any patent rights/ royalty that may arise in this foolish venture. I was suggesting that if anything ever materialized along those lines that you are all ready semi obligated to share with Ogden City since they're funding this whole thing.
Your statement that maybe this could be something for the people to "come together" around this thing is geigeresque, maybe a tad more like Peterson.

Post a Comment

© 2005 - 2014 Weber County Forum™ -- All Rights Reserved