Monday, April 13, 2009

Std-Ex Letter: The Envision Ogden/FNURE Money Laundering Scandal Returns To The Public Spotlight

One Standard-Examiner reader urges a closer look at Envision Ogden fund-raising and campaign donation activities

The Envision Ogden/FNURE money laundering scandal is back in the public print spotlight this morning, with the below-linked Standard-Examiner letter to the editor, under the title "City can't 'amend' FNURE violation," urging that fund-raising and campaign donation activities of Envision Ogden deserve a closer look. This letter appears on the Std-Ex site under a slightly different title:
Why weren't donors informed of Envision's activities?
We agree with Ms. Hamer. If the various individuals involved in the Envision Ogden/FNURE donation conducted themselves with an intent to deceptively misrepresent the true source of funds, criminal violations of the applicable Ogden City ordinance would have been irrevocably committed when all elements of the crime were completed, and would not be susceptible to the "cure" remedies which would be otherwise available to alleged perpetrators in cases of mistake, inadvertence or excusable neglect. This unresolved question would then come down to these actors' knowledge and intent, according to our own analysis.

Despite all the recent public hoopla, the principals in this story continue to keep mum, claiming, like movie mafiosi, that they "don't know nuttin from nuttin." What's apparent is that folks like Councilman Johnson expect this story to blow over before the 2009 municipal election.

Let's not let that happen, gentle readers. Keep on sending your letters to the Std-Ex.

And here's another humdinger of an idea. Inasmuch as Councilman Johnson is a sitting city councilman, who attends most council sessions, he ought to be publicly grilled on the subject at least once a week. Seems to us that at least one lumpencitizen ought to address Mr. Johnson during the council's allotted 3-minute public comments segments in each council meeting from now on, with something like this, (with our apologies to the Watergate Era's Howard Baker):

"What did you know about Envision Ogden and FNURE, Councilman Johnson; and when did you know it?"

We need to keep these people's feet to the fire on this issue, folks. Is there anyone else within our gentle readership who can offer other suggestions as to how we can keep this story on the public attention front-burner, where it belongs?

25 comments:

what would jesus say said...

Enlist Rulon Yorganson

George K. said...

As I suggested in the previous article, why don't several of our Ogden activists as a group file a complaint with the Attorney General's office? They don't do anything if only one person files a complaint, I know! But if several wrote a letter and signed it, maybe then they would consider looking into the matter. Also send copies of the news articles that have been in the paper and any other documentation that is available.

BAT_girl said...

Clarification has just been published in the SE, that EnvisionUtah.org has never been associated with EnvisionOgden the PAC:

Envision Utah has no association with Envision Ogden

http://www.standard.net/live/opinion/letterstotheeditor/169699/

ozboy said...

George

See my reply to this question in the last threat. What you propose makes sense, however these complaints fall on deaf ears regardless of how many citizens complain. The case I referred to about taking it to the state attorney general had eight straight, true and upstanding tax payers signed up to it, with a group of about 5 that went to the AG office in person to deliver it. Results - nothing but a big shine on.

the defination of is, is... said...

Look at the republicans distance themselves from this one.

When will this culture of corruption stop?

RJ Svengali said...

Enlibre?

Just a Dumkoff said...

RJS

Translation, please.

George K. said...

Bat Girl,

The SE is just trying to confuse the issue instead of clarifying it. We've all meant Envision Ogden which Abe Shreeve chairs in our discussions.

what would jesus say said...

Libre Knowledge is knowledge which may be acquired, interpreted and applied freely, it can be re-formulated according to one's needs, and shared with others for community benefit.

Lionel said...

JaD

I think "Enlibre" was a word made up by former Governor Leavitt in an attempt to be creative? Can't quite remember just how he was using it.

Candy said...

Look, folks I think that nixon should have just cured the break in and every thing would be just fine.

momba said...

qouting Leavitt:
“Enlibre is eight principles
that make up a shared doctrine of
balance in the 21st century. It’s a new
word, but Aristotle expressed the
root of the philosophy. Aristotle
called it the golden mean,” said
Leavitt. He went on to list and
illustrate the eight principles, which
include “national standards, neighborhood
solutions,” “collaboration,
not polarization,” and “markets
before mandates,” among others.

from a Symposium Overview: http://www.rff.org/Publications/Resources/Documents/149/RFF-Resources-149-symposium.pdf

The 13th Apostate said...

Obviously there is something fishy going on between Envision Ogden and FNURE and their back door campaign donations. If there have been crimes committed, they need to be prosecuted. A special prosecutor should be set up to look into this matter. It is the only way for the smell of corruption to be cleared out of the Ogden City Council Chambers.

Any honest current government officials would be demanding an investigation in order to clear their “so-called” innocent good names.

No government has the right to operate secret, behind closed doors. The people demand that OUR business to be done in a transparent manner in full sun light. There is something very smelly about the Envision Ogden and FNURE connection.

Johnson needs to return any tainted campaign funds, demand an investigation and voluntarily remove himself from active participation on the city council until his name has been completely cleared of any wrong doing.

monotreme said...

Who's going to take the first shift at the public comments session tonight?

I agree with Rudi, and also with his implicit suggestion that it should be one person per week, and not a bunch. We don't want to be accused of being a lynch mob or having that mentality. It's not about that. It's about, we won't go away until we get answers. We'll keep coming back and asking politely until we get them.

Monotreme said...

My bad. No council meeting tonight (Apr 14). Who is going to "sign up" for Apr 21?

OgdenLover said...

I decided to make a good-faith attempt to find City Council minutes on the Ogden City website rather than complain that they're not available.

What I found is that Minutes are available in pdf format through the Feb 24th meeting. After that, they are there as audio files. However, when I clicked on any of these I got the message
"High security alert!!!

You are not permitted to download the file "00006777.MP3".

URL = http://citydocs.ogdencity.com/FileGetter/getFile.aspx?Doc=00006777.MP3&Key=A05C8FAE91CBA93293ABD106D3D0A702E50B3250"

Why is it not possible to post the minutes in pdf format the week they are approved?

Ogden's Carl Rove said...

Excellent post, OgdenLover! While we're at it, let's ask why Ogden City Council meetings can't be broadcast live or a delayed basis on Boss Godfrey's personal propaganda channel, Comcast Channel 17?

Hundreds of communities across the country do this routinely.

Pay attention, Boss Godfrey and the Godfrey retards on the Ogden City Council:

This Channel 17 clusterf***k will be a major issue in Ogden City Muni Elections 2009.

Dorrene Jeske said...

OCR,

I met with Mayor Godfrey (at his request) in December of 2005, before I took office, and when asked what I would like to see done in the city, I told him that I thought that the Council meetings, the School Board and other community organizations should be able to broadcast on Channel 17. He responded that cost was an issue. But I believe that hearing what's happening in the City is more beneficial to the residents than cartoons.

ozboy said...

Councilwoman Jeske

Everyone knows that cartoons are way more important in Ogden than hearing and seeing what goes on in council meetings. After all, the Godfreyite gang who have a strangle hold on the city is one big cartoon and the Lil Lord hisself is a regular joke.

Alls I can say bout that is the citizens of Ogden are darn lucky to have You, Wicks and Gouchner on board the council. At least there is some connection to reality and sanity in dem der halls of power.

Keep on keeping on, we're mighty proud of the three of you.

just a citizen said...

Who actually "owns" channel 17? Is it owned by the city government or just the mayor's office? If it is the city government, what prevents the City Council from passing an ordinance requiring council meetings to be broadcast on channel 17 and appropriating the $$ to do so? If it is owned by the mayor's office, again, what prevents Council from passing an ordinance changing that. There is more than one part to Ogden's city government isn't there? While I appreciate the actions of folks on the Council and realize that unlike the Mayor they are working part-time, they often sound as though he is their boss. Isn't it the other way 'round? Doesn't the executive branch work for the legislative branch??

Talked to Council member about this once said...

Channel 17 is paid for mostly through a surcharge imposed on every Comcast customer in Ogden City. The Mayor, through his office budget pays the rest. The Mayor's office conols the content as well as contracts with that far past his prime news reporter for the "call in as long as you don't have a probing question show".

Since there seems to be an unwritten rule that the Council and the Mayor don't mess with each other's office budgets, the only option the Council has if they don't agree with programming on Ch 17 is to repeal the Comcast customer fee. I was told some time ago that the Council had investigated options to broadcast meetings and they were looking at six figure numbers and did not feel that was a good use of taxpayer funds at the time.

Dorrene Jeske said...

Talked to a Council member Once About This,

Thanks for answering “Just a Citizen’s” question. The manager is paid to tape and broadcast that which the Mayor wants him to do. Last year the Mayor did cut our original budget so I am guessing that the “hands off” approach to the two government entities budget no longer applies.

There are seven Council members, some of whom are influenced by the Mayor, and I’ve been told that the Council has to pick which battles it fights. We have tried and are still trying to work with the Mayor to let the Council have some time on Channel 17. Hopefully we can address this issue during the upcoming budget.

When I was called into the Mayor’s office the morning after my second Council meeting as a council member, he told me that he did not answer to the Council. Both branches in this form of government are equal in power with differing responsibilities. One is not the “boss” of the other. However, I have received the impression from Mayor Godfrey that he believes that he is our boss, which is sometimes a contentious area.

More is accomplished when the Council and the Mayor work together for the betterment of the community, and the Council has bent over backwards trying to do that. I’m afraid that sometimes it appears to the citizens that we are not effective in doing our job.

Curmudgeon said...

Dorrene:

You wrote: "More is accomplished when the Council and the Mayor work together for the betterment of the community." Absolutely true. And you wrote: " The Council has bent over backwards trying to do that." True as well, and not necessarily a bad thing, being willing to go the extra mile for peace and the good of the city.

And you wrote: "I’m afraid that sometimes it appears to the citizens that we are not effective in doing our job. Also, sadly, true, because compromise, cooperation, working together for the good of the city... all of those things require both levels of government involved, executive [Mayor] and legislative [Council] to take part. When only one of the two is interested in cooperation and working together, a willingness to bend over backward to get something done begins to look instead like capitulation.

So long as the Mayor is unwilling to be part of the governmental process, and instead insists on being in effect all of it, the problems will continue. Under those circumstances, bending over backward to find ways to work together is not a winning strategy, either for the Council or for the people of Ogden City.

OgdenLover said...

"More is accomplished when the Council and the Mayor work together for the betterment of the community, and the Council has bent over backwards trying to do that. I’m afraid that sometimes it appears to the citizens that we are not effective in doing our job.Dorrene, I know you are doing your best. Unfortunately, it is impossible to work with the Mayor unless you are unquestioningly doing his bidding. Maybe it's time the Council stopped trying to cooperate and just admitted that taking an adversarial stand is the only way Ogden will be saved from the clutches of Mighty Matt and his Friends. I know it won't be pleasant, but how else are we going to achieve a measure of fiscal sanity and keep our city from being trashed. Do we want the Golf Course to look like the River Project?

Curmudgeon said...

OL:

You wrote: "Do we want the Golf Course to look like the River Project?" Exactly.

Post a Comment

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