Notice of An Important Emerald City RDA "Blight Hearing" Session

Has there been an attempt by some Ogden City officials to keep the lumpencitizens out of the loop?

Thanks to a tip from Gentle Reader Disgusted in a lower article comments section, we learn that the Ogden City Redevlopment Agency suddenly has a matter on calender for tomorrow, (Tuesday, March 9, 2010) which appears to be the latest chapter in Boss Godfrey's new obsession to declare a 4-block portion of east Washington Blvd., adjacent to the Ogden Junction, a blighted area:

5. Common Consent:
a. East Washington Urban Renewal Area. Proposed Resolution 2010-1 making a finding of blight regarding the proposed East Washington Urban Renewal Project Area and proposed Resolution 2010-2 selecting the East Washington Urban Renewal Project Area in the East Central Urban Renewal Survey Area and authorizing the preparation of a draft project area plan, including a project area budget, pursuant to Section 17C-2-102(1)(a)(ii)(B)(II) and (III), Utah Code Annotated 1953, as amended. (Set public hearing for April 13, 2010 – voice vote. (Link added]

That's right, folks. Boss Godfrey apparently contends that all those architecturally classic and mostly well-maintained buildings on the east side of Washington Blvd., (many of which are vacant due to economic forces related to the still-lingering "Great Recession,") are "blighted."

The last time this matter came up on the RDA calender the matter was wisely dropped by the RDA Board. But just as we predicted, it's right back on calender again, with very short (and obscure) notice to the public (and possibly to affected property owners.)

We'll go on record right now as agreeing with Gentle Reader Disgusted's above-linked take on this:

My comment to the City Council is what the heck is this item up for a vote? Why can’t you at least give some more details as to what is being discussed and voted on here? If you are truly the City Council that wants to add transparency to city governance why are you allowing communications about what you’re doing allowed to go out in such vague form on the topics? Why can’t you have your staff take what is given to them by the administration and add some meat to the description before you forward such information on to the public? Or do you really care about transparency?

According to the provisions of Utah Code Seaction Section 17C-2-102(1)(a)(ii)(B)(II) and (III), which is cited in tomorrow evening's RDA meeting agenda, the RDA Board is at minimum required to hold a a properly-noticed full public hearing prior to making a finding of blight. Here's the operative statutory language:

17C-2-102. Process for adopting urban renewal project area plan -- Prerequisites -- Restrictions.
(1) (a) In order to adopt an urban renewal project area plan, after adopting a resolution under Subsection 17C-2-101(1) the agency shall:...
(B) provide notice of a blight hearing as required under Part 5, Urban Renewal Notice Requirements; and
(C) hold a blight hearing as provided in Section 17C-2-302...

Now in fairness to the Council and the Administration we'll confess we don't know whether the above statutory prerequisites have been met, quietly and behind the scenes. For all we know, all proper notices have gone out, and Tuesday's RDA session will turn out to be a full-blown evidentiary hearing, complete with steely-eyed property owners, cranky lawyers, PowerPoint presentations and everything.

Nevertheless, Gentle Reader Disgusted does make a very important related point on the issue of public transparency, we think. The council's notice to an interested public who might want to attend and speak out at a formal "blight hearing" is hopelessly vague, we believe. And yes, the general public has an important stake in this too... and a cynic would even suggest that the Council really may not wish to have the sometimes "meddlesome" general public attend this hearing.

It seems to us that if the Council had meant to properly inform the lumpencitizens of the importance of the matter which comes before the RDA Board tomorrow evening, it would have phrased the public notice in plain English, like this:

Proposed Resolution 2010-1 making a finding of blight (in preparation for a possible subsequent eminent domain condemnation action) in the area encompassing a full 4 downtown city blocks in the heart of Ogden's Central Business District, from 20th to 24th; and east from Washington to Adams Avenue

Instead, the Council phrased it in obtuse legelese.

So what say out gentle readers about this? Is it possible that the above-linked public hearing notice was actually drafted by the Mayor's office, to keep lumpencitizens out of the loop? Are we witnessing once again the flounderings of a brand-new City Council which yet remains susceptible (in its fledgling innocence) to Boss Godfrey's procedural maneuverings? Is it possible that Boss Godfrey is "trying on" the new Council Leadership to see whether he can slip a little something by them?

So many questions... so few answers.

At any rate, the word is now out. And yes... from the evidence it appears that Tuesday's hearing will likely consist of a full blown "blight hearing."

Hopefully more than a few of our own readers will be motivated to attend tomorrow's tantalizing RDA session.

And with a little luck, maybe a few of them will report back here.

We'll leave the lower comments section open for any post RDA session reports of course, as always.