At the suggestion of one of our gentle readers, we'll put the spotlight on the following back-burner Standard-Examiner news item, which is probably deserving of at least some Weber County Forum reader discussion.
Scott Schwebke sets forth the essential facts in his opening paragraphs, wherein he describes the full panoply of expenditures which would be funded by the diversion of a cool $ 1 mil of BDO lease revenues into the administration's hot little hands:
OGDEN -- The city council decided Tuesday night to continue until Nov. 1 a public hearing on a request from the administration to use about $1 million in Business Depot Ogden lease revenues to help revitalize east central neighborhoods.Read Tuesday's full Standard-Examiner story here:
The continuance is needed to allow the city council more time to study the request, said Bill Cook, the council's executive director.
Specifically, the administration is requesting $550,000 for its infill housing program, which would refurbish or reuse existing homes that are in poor condition or, in some cases, build new dwellings on lots.
The administration also wants $250,000 for its unit- reduction program, which aims to reduce or eliminate rental units in single-family homes to stabilize neighborhoods.
In addition, the administration is seeking $287,000 in BDO lease revenue for infrastructure improvements in east central Ogden, including new sidewalks, curb and gutter, and water utility improvements.
For a (slightly) more detailed description of the Administration's request to expend a cool million bucks toward Boss Godfrey's most recent wish list, check out last Tuesday's full September 27, 2011 Council Packet:
We've given Godfrey's list a quick once over, and we'll volunteer that what we're seeing is a full declension of proposed expenditures, running from those which would be designated for obviously legitimate public use items such as "sidewalks, curb and gutter, and water utility improvements," to some highly questionable public funds expenditures, such as "refurbish[ing] or reus[ing] existing homes that are in poor condition or, in some cases, build[ing] new dwellings on lots." So with respect to the range of the proposed expenditures (vaguely) included in the Administration's request, we'll ask out gentle readers to chime in below, to offer their own opinions as to which items on Boss Godfrey's list are legit... and which are not.
We had the opportunity to speak with Council woman Amy Wicks this morning by the way, to inquire about why the Council put this matter over for later action. Frankly, we'd already reviewed the above council packet over the weekend, and had fully expected the current council, which pretty much bends to the will of the Godfrey administration when it arrives at the council door looking for a handout, to robotically give this proposal the usual "rubber stamp." To our great delight, Ms. Wicks informed us this morning that the council was uncomfortable with the vague language of the administration request, had suffered some heartburn about the concept of doling out $1 Million in taxpayer dough to the Little Lord with virtually no strings attached, and therefore unanimously decided to continue the matter for further public hearing to November 1, 2011, and in the interim, to set the council staff to work formulating a full set of firm and specific guidelines, defining how these funds would be administered by the spendthrift Godfrey Administration, (if they are to be so administered at all).
That folks, is a suddenly conscientious City Council firing on all cylinders, wethinks. Frankly we didn't know they had it in 'em.
So in closing, you're all invited to examine Boss Godfrey's proposed wish list, and offer your own takes on which items are (or are not) legit.
Have at it, O Gentle Ones.
