Emerald City: A "republic" ruled by a dictator
By George K.
Reporter Schwebke reveals that the Mayor is once again at odds with the Council in his story in the Standard Examiner this morning, headlined "Conflict over Mount Ogden course."
He did a great job of reporting Councilwoman Gochnour's comments last night at Council Meeting. I found it most interesting to read that Kent Petersen did not receive the word that some of the Council members wanted to serve on his now infamous golf course committee. I wonder if that's what happened to the list of suggested committee members that Councilwoman Jeske gave the administration. I understand that Councilwoman Gochnour's list was given to Todd Brenkman. There's a couple of different scenarios about what happened to that list: 1) Todd gave the list to Godfrey and he didn't give it to Kent or 2) Godfrey told him to conveniently misplace it.
It's most interesting that Kent Petersen said that he doesn't want the committee influenced by the administration nor the council, but he allowed Godfrey to attend the first meeting and give the opening statements! This whole process and the committee are a joke and a mockery of democracy. But then Godfrey's favorite saying is, "We don't live in a democracy, we live in a republic." I'll go one further -- "We live in a republic ruled by dictator!"
The criticism I have of Schwebke's reporting, is that he repeats Godfrey's position on the golf course without really finding the cause for the decline of golfers. There is nothing wrong with the design of the golf course -- that's what makes it unique and a challenge to play. Because of lack of money, personnel and equipment to keep the brush cut back, the fairways have narrowed some. That's a management problem... and maintenance problems aren't a priority at Mt. Ogden for Mr. Brenkman.
I am glad to see that Mr. Schwebke reports that the council is having problems dealing with the Mayor's chicanery. On the whole, it was a good article.
© 2005 - 2014 Weber County Forum™ -- All Rights Reserved
22 comments:
Elder Godfrey:
Please surrender your temple recommend.
GK:
You wrote: The criticism I have of Schwebke's reporting, is that he repeats Godfrey's position on the golf course without really finding the cause for the decline of golfers.There is nothing wrong with the design of the golf course....
Seems to me that was not his job on this story. You seem to want him to resolve the question about what the problem, if there is a problem, with the golf course is, and to resolve it in your favor. That might be something appropriate for an SE editorial to tackle, or an op-ed piece. It would not be appropriate for a reporter to try to resolve that question himself in a straight news story such as this one was.
I've often wondered how he is able to keep it.
Once again, Hizzonah's truly stunning inability to govern effectively, even in ways that would enhance his influence, is on display, thanks to the SE story. Once again, an informal agreement with the Council seems to have been ignored [much like the agreement that the City lobbyist would work on projects both the Mayor and Council agree on].
I confess, I am beginning to wonder if this is the result of Hizzonah's penchant for duplicity and his determination to ignore the views of any other branch of government but his own --- clearly the most popular option here at WCF --- or if he just flat does not how to do things well, even when doing them well would redound to his benefit, if he truly has no idea how to work together with anyone for the good of the city. He's shot himself in the foot so many times, I'm starting to think it may be he can't help himself.
There was a simple way to constitute this committee to look into MOGC's revenue problems that would have resulted in the Committee having substantial credibility [as the present one does not]. Simplicity itself:
1. The Mayor should have appointed on man to represent his administration on the committee. And he should have invited the council to appoint one member of the committee.
2. The directer of golf operations for Ogden should have been appointed by the Mayor to the committee, and the Mt. Ogden Golfers association [whatever it's called] should have been invited by the Mayor to appoint someone to the committee.
3. The remaining four slots would be filled from volunteers or names put in by anyone who wanted it, with the proviso that the remaining appointees would have to get a "yes" vote from three of the four original committee members.
4. This would have meant that if say Mr. B. Geiger volunteered, presumably the MOGC and City Council member would have nixed his appointment. And it would mean that if one of our many "GODFREY IS A NAZI AND ALL HE DOES IS EVIL!" posters volunteered, the Mayor's appointee and the golfing manager would have prevented his appointment.
5. The resulting committee, when finally formed, would have had substantial credibility as one so composed that all sides on the matter of the MOGC were represented, and that the final report, whatever it was, would have emerged from a wide consideration of all possible issues, and would have gotten the backing of at least some of the last four general public appointees.
Simplicity itself.
But no. Instead, Hizzonah stacks the committee by naming a political ally as its head, giving him full appointive powers to name the rest of the committee, then appears before it, supplies it with quarters and service through his office. And we have no guarantee that the committee considered anything other than a Mayoral-favored approach to what the problem is and what sort of solution ought to be offered.
He's so ham-fistedly incompetent at running his own administration, I'm almost sorry for him.
Almost.
Why is this committee run by a bunch of non golfers? Why is the course losing money, is it because goofy is not advertising it? Goofy get a clue any 5th grader could run this course and MAKE MONEY!!!!!
You are as tall as a 5th grader now go to Polk school and learn what you need to do. or is a charter school what you really need.
Curm,
The problem with your suggested way of putting together the committee is that then our mayor would have had very little control over it. What if such a committee had come back and recommended against the mayor's $6 million "nuclear option"? What if they had concluded that the main problem with the golf course was mismanagement? Godfrey can't take that chance.
Dan:
So, he ends up with a "citizens committee," politely so-called, that has clearly been stacked by him, that has by its means of appointment already ticked off Council members, and whose recommendations will then have, at best, limited credibility outside of the Mayor's own circle. All of which ends up weakening his position and limiting support for what he wants. Doesn't look like a very competent way to proceed to me.
I agree with you that he seems not to be interested... never has been, really... in finding middle ways, in incorporating ideas from those outside his own administration clique... in cooperating in any meaningful and sustained way with the Council on divisive issues, or even in appearing to keep his word to the Council. But he's so clumsy about how he proceeds, so ham-fisted in the way he deals with the Council and others, that in the end it hurts him rather than helps him.
A competent executive would know how to get most [not all, but most] of what he wants in ways that foster a willingness to cooperate with him, that create a bank, so to speak, of good will and trust on which he can draw, when necessary, to his advantage. Godfrey seems either unable to understand that... what effective administration consists of... or, if he does understand it, he's unable to implement it.
When I first moved here, with an election looming, I asked an acquaintance who seemed to be well informed about local political affairs, about the Mayor and whether I ought to vote for him. He said "the Mayor does not play well with others." The more I've gotten to see of Godfrey in office, the more I've come to think that analysis of what passes for his administrative style was dead on accurate.
I agree with George K. The main problem with Mt Ogden is not the lay out it is how the course is run. Very few carts are in good working order. And for a course that is not so easy to walk it is imperative that the carts are something people would want to ride in. Other little things could be done to improve the course and its attractiveness to area players. The question that needs to be asked is why does Valley View, a course owned and run by Davis county, and a very difficult course at that, do so much better than Mt Ogden?
If it weren't so serious, it would actually be funny.
Mountains of debt? Losing money? Poorly designed? un-playable? Where to begin?
Has any one really pealed the layers back to see what's real?
All these unfounded,un-researched and un verified statements come from the mouth of one individual that knows nothing about the game of golf, and has a very long reputation for stretching the truth and outright telling falsehoods, LYING.
He's being bolstered and served by a young, naive golf pro, so afraid of losing his job while chasing some imaginary carrot on a stick that he doesn't see that he's way out of his league and in water way over his head.
Think about a head pro going on record telling the whole world that his product and livelihood is poorly designed, seriously flawed, un-playable and needs to be done away with? Meantime the worlds leading golf publication is pronouncing this same facility a 4 star golf course and one of the best places to play.
Who besides this dishonest cruet and his intimidated mouthpiece is on record, with any credibility, making such statements? It's a secret.
Serious financial burden on our government. Because their grand idea of collecting interest from themselves on money used elsewhere is not being collected. Could it be that the city fleet department has all ready skimmed all the excess revenues? How about $15.00 a month for stainless steal outdoor drinking faucets, of very cheap design and craftmanship, charged monthly,( winters included) for 25 years. How about a 16 year old pick-up truck that's not road worthy because everytime it leaves the premises it needs be be towed back, all this for a mere $500.00 a month.( this lease deal even included replacement factored in) That alone is $96,000.00, thats one hell of a truck!
Please consider that I have Council minutes from a meeting 2 years before this mayor was first elected, where John Arrington, the present chief book cooker, proudly states that the golf course is always making money.
Now, on no verification what so ever we have a savior in in a new, unpolitical concerned citizens committee willing to train their unbiased, open and very astute minds on our life threatening problem. Some in the community were very concerned that this saving group of dupes and non golfers might be tarnished by an undue blast of disengenuous mayorial flatulence, so they formed a sub committee. All of this based on the sayso of one little ethically challenged truth avoiding narcissist being driven by his own devious ulterior motives. And that motivation is hardly an unkept secret.
The sad thing is that the guy capable of providing the satisfaction for all is at his wits end, his budget cut for 4 straight years and no sanity in sight.
I hope he knows that we, the real users and supporters of this beatifull, very playable public facility love and appreciate him and all he does for us.
Thank You Jeff.
Addendum to last post.
I wasn't quite accurate about the truck. It's not towed back to the course, it's towed down to fleet, where they repair it usung marked up parts and charge much higher labor costs than other local mechanics, further depleting Jeff's constantly shrinking budget.
Are there no women golfers in Ogden? Apparently not based on the committee make-up. They're only a little over 50% of the population in general and would obviously be uninterested in how the city should proceed with one of its largest segments of publicly-owned land (except for those weirdoes Jeske and Gochnour). They would obviously have no input on how the golf course could be better marketed to those of their gender.
Besides, based on anyone who heard Mr. Peterson's door-to-door canvassing when he ran for office got to listen to his “What does a housewife know about city finances?” pitch. Oh wait, maybe that was somewhat unsuccessful. How many thousands of dollars more in campaign finances (buyoffs) did he have over Gochnour and still get spanked in the election?
Hmmmmmmmmmm.
Godfrey and his minions, including the skipper Kent the wiener Petersen, think women should be kept out of sight, and not to be heard from.
Curmudgeon, I’m not surprised that you found fault with my post; I would have been surprised had you not. To my criticism of Schwebke’s article that “he repeats Godfrey position on the golf course without really finding the cause for the decline of golfers” you said, “Seems to me that was not his job on this story.” I’ll agree I should have chosen my words more carefully, but I still hold that it is not good reporting to repeat what the Mayor says and not give him the credit. As he wrote it, he makes it sound like the golf course is to blame for the decline of golfers when in fact, that is actually the Mayor’s opinion – not a fact.
Curmudgeon, BTW, I like your post very much – a little lengthy – but for the most part good. Your theory for a process to determine the members of the committee sounds good, but I wonder who would go to all that work to form a committee.
Greiner the whiner,
You said, “Why is the course losing money, is it because goofy is not advertising it?” Of course “Goofy” is advertising it! He is always saying that it is a difficult course to play – no one wants to play it! It needs to be completely leveled and rebuilt as an easy course at the price tag of only six to eight million dollars!
Wouldn’t you want to go play it with such an endorsement?
GK:
You wrote: Of course “Goofy” is advertising it! He is always saying that it is a difficult course to play – no one wants to play it....
Wouldn’t you want to go play it with such an endorsement?
Exactly. I found it astonishing that the Mayor of a city regularly went before cameras and reporters to declare HIS city's only 18 hole municipal golf course "not golfer friendly." That's a first in my experience. Mostly mayors go out of their way to promote their city's recreational venues, not deride them. But then, most mayors are not working to sell their city's largest park and municipal golf course to a crony for real estate development. Ours was.
My dear friend Curmudgeon, you're speaking in past tense. Lying little matty is still trying to get our course and adjacent lands into the hands of his boyfriend.
The skipper's role in this is to reccommend rebuilding, moving the clubhouse and this would free up more prime building lots for expensive houses. Brenkman has all ready acknowleged that to many golfers. His spin is the sale of the property would be used to improve the course. The newest trial balloon, creating a private foundation to operate and manage the facility should make him nervous as hell. Who could justify his nice new salary as director og golf, if all he's doing is running the tiny El Monte golf course?
This bogus foundation thing smells alot like the asset stealing Riverside Technology Foundation/Ogden Community Foundation Amcan scam. This stupid idea should be a non starter.
If the Council were to eliminate the stupid questionable debt payments and look at the numbers without the influence of these, you'd find there's really no reason for any of this BS.
These committees sound to many like they have merit, and are a practical means of looking at a problem that exsists. The truth is, they aren't needed, nor are they qualified to make the determinations they're approaching.
Who's providing either committee with history, background or any other important information that needs to be looked at? Brinkman, the mayor.
How about the fact that all these folks are operating off a statement, unfounded and subjective, not unlike looking at artwork, made by a lying little mayor with well known ulterior motives backed up by a novice golf pro, that prior to this last year had never spent more than an hour or two at this facility? This same pro that splits the maintainence budget almost equally between both courses depite the fact that one course is more than twice the size.
If that's not an attempt to orchestrate failure, what is it?
Curm, my point is this is present tense.
Comment moved to main arrticle
let me see if my 5th grade math serves me right. 6,000,000.00 divided by 200,000.00 lose per year would be 30 years to even brake even. so Godfrey don't leave us this boges bill to deal with, long after your gone out of office.
Billy Boy
You wrote: "Lying little matty is still trying to get our course and adjacent lands into the hands of his boyfriend"
Now with that you got me a little confused. I was under the impression that the little peckerhead was hooked up with Stu and that he was trying to rip off the course and give to to Peterson.
Are you telling us that the punk is cheating on Stu with Peterson? or is he stringing Peterson along while really intending for the course to end up with Stu?
Please clarify. Is he doing Stu or Peterson or both or are they all doing a threesome?
bill c. you said with reference to the "committees"-
The truth is, they aren't needed nor are they qualified to make the determinations they're approaching.
Seems to me Bill that you're painting with a wide brush. Do you even know who is on the subcommittee that you're badmouthing much less what they are trying to accomplish.
"The truth is", Hoyle's subcommittee is looking at Mount Ogden from the viewpoint of the median ability golfer (average, if you prefer). They are not responding to theGodfrey/Brinkman "the course is poorly designed" - not one subcommittee member believes that crap. You referred to the changes they are recommending as tweeks and that is precisely what they are: minor changes to make the course more enjoyable for those who are of average ability. And just for the record, the tweeks don't compromise the challenge that you low handicappers thrive on. Some of the changes relate to safety issues on the cart paths - 12,000 lineal feet of them - I measured them BTW, I am the only subcommittee member who is not an active golfer and incidentally, I'm a non-voting member.
I get the impression from your posts that you are miffed by the fact that you haven't been ask to serve on a committee. As a matter of fact, you are on a committee, I believe it is referred to as the Mount Ogden Men's Association and this group should have all the credibility in the world. Apparently though, no one has taken the time nor expended the effort to organize or do much more than complain up to this point, i.e., (hope your letter to the Council gets results). One last thing, to my knowledge, no one has provided either committee with history, background, or any other "important information". The fact is, the subcommittee has been too busy trying to counter the efforts of the Godfreys and Brenkmens to spend much time on the matters you mentioned. As for history, it would be interesting but not all that useful unless you happened to have a copy of the document deeding the property to the citizens of Ogden.
boys club again
The subcommittee mentioned above has a lady golfer and a darn good one.
Post a Comment