Standard-Examiner Editorial: OUR VIEW: Education VS. States' Rights

We're scratching our heads wondering why there are at least a few in the legislature who would draw the line at accepting federal money intended to aid Utah schoolchildren

Following up on Charlie Trentelman's 8/21/10 column, the Standard-Examiner carries a fine editorial this morning, lambasting the handful of Utah legislative ideologues who've been engaging in legal maneuverings to turn down $101 million in federal aid for the Utah public school system:

• OUR VIEW: Education vs. states' rights

On August 17, 2010, the Salt Lake Tribune reported that the State of Utah has already lapped up $3 billion in federal stimulus money; so we confess we're scratching our heads wondering why there are at least a few in the legislature who would suddenly draw the line at accepting federal money intended to aid Utah schoolchildren. In view of the massive stimulus infusion that's already been accepted by the Utah legislature, it seems to us it's a little late in the game to be compaining of the taint of another $101 million in federal earmark money, which in the big picture amounts to a relatively insignificant drop in the bucket.

We sometimes have difficulty figuring out the Utah legislative wingnut mind. Perhaps a few of our WCF readers can provide us some insight into the politically correct wingnut perspective on this.

Feel free to chime in on this topic, or treat this as an open topic thread.

Update 8/27/10 9:47 a.m.: Thanks to the following comment from Gentle Reader James, we now have some insight into our legislators' seemingly odd behavior:

• Federal education funds grant will lead to tax increases

Message Bills Redux: Blowback From The Oval Office?

Are the Utah legislature's "message bills" and the Obama Adminstration's cancellation of Utah aerospace industry contracts causally connected?

During the past Utah legislative session, the northern Utah (and national) press has devoted a substantial amount of ink to the series of "message bills" which gushed out of the Utah legislature during the last general session, heightening the awareness of Utahns to the 2010 legislature's agenda to draw a line in the sand and stand up to the encroachment of the federal government upon the "sovereign rights" of Utah, as reserved to the citizens by theTenth Amendment. Northern Utah media chimed in on the topic recently here and here; and the topic even graced the pages of the New York Times late last month. The national cable news media have also been whipping up a political frenzy and bringing the "States Rights" movement to the national public forefront too, as the lower Fox News video attests:


Did ya's catch the part about the "civilist war?"

The Standard-Examiner carried a recent editorial on this subject, offering the opinion, in a nutshell, that despite all the legislative sound and fury, these "messages bills"... "will ultimately "fall on deaf ears."

As to that proposition we're not quite sure; and in that connection we'll direct our readers' attention to a troubling story which appeared in the Std-Ex on Friday:

• Obama plan leaves ATK outside looking in

Similar stories also appeared last week in the Deseret News and the Salt Lake Tribune.

So what about it, gentle readers? Is the Obama administration's decision to cut one of Utah's top employers (ATK) out of the federal funding loop a mere coincidence? Has the Utah legislature's strident anti-federal states rights posture truly fallen on "deaf" oval office ears, as the Std-Ex suggests? Or is it possible that what we are now witnessing a demonstration of a cause-and-effect nexus between Utah legislative "sword rattling" on the one hand, and federal government retribution on the other? Is it inconceivable that the Obama Administration is replying to us with a strong "message" all its own? Is anyone willing to rule out the possibility that federal officials are now playing hard-ball in response to the state legislature's hard anti-federal stance? Do these initial state/federal menuverings signal the initial skirmishes in advance of what to come to be a new Utah War, Part Deux? If so, we all hope all conscientious Utah citizens have their emergency food supplies all stocked up. You DO HAVE an emergency food stash, right? And don't forget to load up the truck with them Utah-manufactured guns, just in case.

So many questions.. so few answers.

Let's hear it from our gentle readers.

Update 4/19/10 2:45 p.m.: Quickie quiz... Who is the greatest patriot in American history? Check out our WCF cheat-sheet:

1) Thomas Jefferson
2) James Madison
3) George Washington
4) Patrick Henry
5) Hunter S. Thompson
6) Carl Wimmer
7) Other

Just for fun, take our poll:

• Best American Patriot Ever

This poll will also be planted in our right sidebar for the next coupla days or so.

Salt Lake Tribune: Governor Herbert Signs Two More 2010 "Message Bills" Into Law

The 2010 Utah legislature's "messages" do seem to be getting through

O wad some Power the giftie gie us to see oursels as ithers see us!

Robert Burns
To A Louse
(On seeing one on a lady's bonnet at church)
1759-96)

Following fast upon this year's 2010 Utah legislative session, which will be mostly remembered for crackpot "message bills" and other bizarre political posturings, The Salt Lake Tribune reports that Utah Governor Gary Herbert has signed into law two more of these "quixotic" bills, which would ostensibly "authorize the use of eminent domain to take some of the U.S. government's most valuable parcels":

• Guv approves use of eminent domain to take federal land

We'll thus invoke the above-cited wise words of Scottish poet Bobbie Burns, and note with considerable amusement that the 2010 Utah legislature's "messages" do seem to be "getting through," at least to some elements of the greater U.S. population:

• Welcome to Glennbeckistan

Okay. So who's ready for some hot-tubbin'?

Update 3/30/10 7:00 a.m.: Charlie Trentelman goes off on these two above-mentioned eminent domain message bills in yesterday's delightful Blogging the Rambler blog rant linked below:

• Utah snatching fed land? But that’s MY land

We'll give Charlie's closing paragraphs, which highlight the harsh discrepancy between the legislature's words and deeds, an especially hearty thumbs up:

Then there’s the whole question of Utah using eminent domain to take land just because it wants it. As I’ve said before, Utah’s Legislature doesn’t really believe in smaller government. All it believes in is a smaller FEDERAL government.
It would love to see the STATE OF UTAH’s government get a whole lot bigger, and more powerful. The legislators showed that when they tried to make miscarriages illegal, and when they’ve tried to make abortions illegal, and when they’ve tried to micromanage drinking and legislate just about every aspect of private life that just doesn’t happen to meet their moral or religious code.
And then they sit around and talk about freedom.

It's a danged good read, all-in-all.

Check it out.

Salt Lake Tribune: Foes Cry Foul On Petition Law Fixes

Sign the petitions, folks! You can tell the anti-ethics goons to "go to hell" later

"Putting an issue on the ballot for public discourse is democracy at its finest," she said. "The effort to scuttle that debate is tantamount to tyranny."

Attorney Lisa Watts Baskin
Salt Lake Tribune
Foes cry foul on petition law fixes
March 18, 2010

Excellent Cathy McKitrick writeup in this morning's Salt Lake Tribune, reporting on the reaction to Sen. Howard Stephenson's SB275, which "removes the [statutory] requirement for a notary to get signatures removed from petitions, and gives opponents an extra inning to play after the other team has left the field."

More from Watts Baskin:

"Opponents have a full month" -- until May 15 -- "to take potshots by name and address," Watts Baskin said. Overturning just one Senate district -- the one with the slimmest margin -- keeps an initiative off the ballot.

Fed up with watching the spectacle of power-mad Utah legislators fighting like badgers to preserve their current pay-to-play legislative system?

Distressed at the prospect of having anti-ethics goons showing up at your doorstep to strong-arm you into removing your signature from the petitions?

Here's the simple two-step anti-tyranny process, folks:

1) Sign the petitions NOW:

• Fair Boundaries Redistricting Initiative
• Utahns For Ethical Government (UEG) Initiative

2) You can tell the goons to "go to hell" (and call the cops) LATER.

Need We Say More?

Retake your democracy... Sign the Petition!

By: Utahns For Ethical Government
(Via Facebook)

NEED WE SAY MORE? The Utah Senate majority leader resigns after a DUI scandal began the 2010 session; the Utah House majority leader resigns after a hot tub scandal ended the session. The UEG initiative is a bold attempt to change a legislative culture unworthy of Utah.

Retake your democracy.

Sign the petition at www.utahethics.org.

Poor Ol' GOP House Rep Kevin Garn Finds Himself In The Political Hotseat

Vote in our new online poll!

Poor ol' Davis County Republican House Majority Leader Kevin Garn. When this story broke yesterday, we thought he'd be able to sweep it under the rug, and that the controversy would simply blow over, with his contrite Thursday confession on the State House floor.

Nope. Looks like all hell is breaking loose. Here's the latest skinny on our Davis County skinny-dipping State House Rep, straight from our home town newspaper, the Standard-Examiner:

• GOP leader’s skinny-dip confession sparks outrage

This story is BIG NEWS all over the country; but we'll focus on one writeup that we liked the best. Here's the lead from a little blog called "The Frisky" (Love, Life, Stars, Style), under the title, Utah Lawmaker Admits To Hot Tub Frolic With Underaged Girl:

It’s a story ripped from an episode of “Jersey Shore”: Utah’s House Majority Leader, Rep. Kevin Garn, admitted yesterday that in 2002 he paid a woman $150,000 to keep quiet during his Congressional campaign about a 1985 incident where they sat naked in a hot tub together. Garn, who is 55 now, was 30 at the time; the girl, Cheryl Maher, who is 40 now, was 15 at the time.

At the foot of the story, the author asks this thoughtful and highly pertinent question:

Garn has said he will not resign, but he has not said he would seek re-election.
Do you think Garn should resign? Or do you think that because there was allegedly no sexual contact, and it happened 25 years ago, that Garn’s behavior is forgivable?

Looks like good fodder for a reader poll. What's your take on this, O Gentle Ones?

• Vote in our online poll!

And don't forget our lower comments section.

Update 3/13/2010 1:37 p.m.:

Dan S. has a great story and analysis on his blog, which has heretofore only dealt mainly with "science issues." Be sure to check it out:

• The Fourth Estate?

Good to see Dan S. with another " bee in his bonnet," No?

Utah Citizens' Initiative Petition Update

You know what to do... Do it on the internet

Red meat news is a mite skimpy this Tuesday morning, so we thought we'd take the opportunity to make yet another pitch for the Utahns For Ethical Government Ethics Reform Petition Initiative drive, which has a little over a month remaining before the April 15, 2010 signature submission deadline.

Weber County Forum readers got a pretty harsh dose of reality regarding the depth of ethical problems in the Utah Legislature just last week, of course, when Rep. Gage Froerer candidly informed us that elements within the Utah Senate were putting the arm on the Ogden Valley citizens for a cool 25 Grand... you know ... to hire a lobbyist to grease the skids for his HB 218 [wink-wink]. It's in that context that we thought UEG's new TeeVee commercial might strike a lumpencitizen nerve, and spur on any readers who haven't yet signed the petition to get to it right now:

And for those readers who might require a little extra convincing, check out the two most recent Standard-Examiner editorials on the subject:

• OUR VIEW: Utah House nixes spending limits • OUR VIEW: More legislative ethicsphobia

Here's the link to the UEG electronic petition; and here are the links to the other two petitions (including Fair Boundaries) which are still in circulation and in need of your signatures.

You know what to do.

Do it on the internet.

Salt Lake Tribune: Initiative Group Rolls Out Final Push

If ever Utah citizens are to put their legislature's feet to the fire and enact strong Utah legislative ethics reform, the time to do it is RIGHT NOW!

It's been a while since we last provided a writeup on the pending citizens initiative petitions which are circulating through Utah even now, so we'll put the spotlight on this morning's Salt Lake Tribune story, to again return the topic to the Weber County Forum front page:

• Initiative group rolls out final push

From this morning's story:

On the steps of the State Capitol, and underneath a threatening March sky, Utahns for Ethical Government announced its last big push --- a "march to the ballot."
The grassroots group now has less than six weeks to finish gathering the 95,000 signatures needed to place a broad ethics reform initiative on November's ballot.
Strategy includes a revamped Web site, a television ad and Saturday gatherings scheduled at local libraries from noon to 3 p.m. More information can be found online at www.utahethics.org.
"The citizens deserve a real opportunity for real ethics reform," said UEG Chairman Kim Burningham, comparing the Legislature's ethics package -- which lawmakers have rolled out over the past six weeks -- to a "crust" of bread.

The Utah legislative majority of course which has dropped all pretense of standing for robust ethics reform during the current legislative session, continues its unsavory war against the citizens of Utah, and is also "doing its part" to undermine the UEG Citizens' Ethics Reform Initiative:

Initiative proponents now find themselves facing steep opposition from a majority of Utah's lawmakers who have denounced their effort.
Just an hour before UEG's noon announcement, House members approved Sen. Howard Stephenson's SB275 in a 50-24 vote, which makes it easier for petition signers to remove their names [from petitions] after having second thoughts.

With six week left before the petition submission deadline, we agree that it's time to get into gear for that "last big push --- a 'march to the ballot.'"

So once again, here's the link to the now-revamped Utahns For Ethical Government website, where those readers who haven't yet signed the UEG petition can do so in electronic form. And for those cautious readers among us, those who'd still prefer to do it the old fashioned way, you'll find a hard-copy petition locations module in the right column of the same page (and at the bottom of the page), with convenient county-by-county contact links.

And for the benefit of those readers who'd like to take a look at the full array of citizen petitions on the 2010 Utah citizens' "grass roots smorgasbord," check out our handy WCF archive link below:

• Pending Utah Citizens' Initiative Petitions

Time's running short, O Gentle Ones. If ever Utah citizens are to put the legislature's feet to the fire and enact strong Utah legislative ethics reform, the time to do it is RIGHT NOW!

Powder Mountain Update: Important Public Information Session Set For The State Capitol on Thursday - UPDATED

In a very real sense, the ball is now decidedly "in the citizens' court."

As regular Weber County Forum readers are well aware, over the course of the period since Rep. Froerer's HB 218 stalled in the Senate Government operations Committee by a 3-3 vote, the Powder Mount Developer, the Weber County Commission and representatives of litigants in the Powder Mountain citizens' lawsuit have been engaged in intense negotiations, in a last minute effort to arrive at an agreement which would settle issues in contention, take the Powder Mountain town incorporation proceeding off the table and render Rep. Froerer's remedial voter rights legislation moot. Unfortunately, it's now evident that these negotiations have broken down, according to information which we received via email yesterday from Rep. Froerer:

I just got off the phone with Comm. Dearden and he communicated too me that they are not going to sign any deal at this late hour.... Let me make myself clear there will be no deal before the end of the session. If this is something the citizens in Ogden Valley want done now is the time to pull out the stops and put the energy into passing my bill...

Within yesterday's email, Rep. Froerer also informed us that he has scheduled a public information session at the State Capitol for Thursday, the details of which Rep. Froerer provided to us in a telephone conversation late yesterday evening:

What: Public information briefing and question & answer session on the subject of HB 218 and related matters.
Where: Senate (East) Building, Utah State Capitol, Room #215
When: Thursday, March 4, 2010, 12:00 p.m. (noon)
Formal Agenda: AGENDA - HB 218 – Disincorporation of Powder Mt. Town

Rep. Froerer further informs us that both he and Commissioner Dearden will be present to provide updates on Rep. Froerer's bill and the status of negotiations between the various adverse parties, as well as information about how Ogden Valley citizens (and indeed Utah citizens in general) can now (and once again) assist Rep. Froerer in his effort to push his bill toward passage in the Senate.

We'd also like to salute Rep. Froerer and Comm. Dearden for their continuing efforts to permanently resolve this matter one way or another, and for scheduling a public meeting which will add much-needed transparency to the process and hopefully alleviate the most recent lumpencitizen heartburn.

We likewise urge citizens who are interested in this matter to put Thursday's meeting on their calenders and make a special effort to attend this important event. In a very real sense, the ball is now decidedly "in the citizens' court."

We'll have our own WCF reporter in attendance, of course, and will accordingly report back upon the conclusion of the meeting with details and proposed citizen-activist strategies.

That's it for the moment, Gentle Readers.

Who would like to offer their comment?

Update 3/2/10 3:01 pm.: We've now updated this article with the specific assigned committee room number, and added a link to the Formal Meeting Agenda above.

Powder Mountain Update: Weekend Time Out

But first... several additional budding developments which have come to our attention since our last WCF posting on this subject

As we enter into the weekend, we'll temporarily put the Powder Mountain story to rest, until at least next week. Before we do that however, we'd like to inform our readers about several budding developments which have come to our attention since our last WCF posting on this subject:

1) Regarding the pendency of Rep. Froerer's HB 218, we received this voice message from Senator Allen Christen, the bill's Senate sponsor, which indeed confirms that the Powder Mountain Developer and the County Commission seem to be on the verge of a settlement deal:

The bill [HB 218] is stalled in committee. It's not dead; it's not gone. But we have at least temporarily,we have a letter from the developer saying that they will stand down, not try to to incorporate, run everything back through the planning commission, and essentially do the same thing. They just don't want to have this done to them. I've seen the letter; the Commissioners still have to agree to it, and if that's amenable to them, then everybody's going to back off, and hopefully let this thing go away.

We subsequently spoke with Senator Christensen by phone, who further confirmed, to our considerable initial disappointment, that despite its offer to "stand down," the Powder Mountain Developer has unfortunately not yet offered to permanently relinquish its right to later resume its action for Powder Mountain Town incorporation. Inasmuch as we've as yet been unable to obtain an electronic copy of this letter, we'll thus offer no commentary on whatever substantive terms may be contained therein.

2) We've been informed by a reliable source that the Weber County Commission had at some recent point set a public hearing for March 16, to discuss a mysterious "Memorandum of Understanding" (MOU), but that this hearing has now been taken off-calender. Presumably it'll be returned to the calender for public hearing, once Commission and Developer legal eagles have dotted all the i's and crossed all the t's.

3) We've also been informed by several independent sources, gentle reader Laura among them, that Senate Government Ops Committee members McAdam and Robles have responded to lumpencitizen persuasion, and are prepared to vote in favor of recommending that HB 218 be advanced to the Senate floor for deliberation and debate, in the event that the committee would re-convene to re-consider the matter. Of course that's all hearsay; so take it for what it's worth.

4) We also had a short conversation with Rep. Froerer late yesterday afternoon, wherein he reconfirmed that he remains ready to "pull the trigger" and continue, if necessary, to push his bill forward for a full Senate vote. In this context however he also offered the cautionary admonition that a sizable number of the key players in this battle, including some litigants in the Powder Mountain citizens lawsuit, are expressing concern about throwing the bill in front of the Senate, where strong opposition forces continue to oppose HB 218. Rather than taking the risk of a Senate "crapshoot," an influential faction of the prospective "Powderville" residents are therefore apparently leaning in favor of the "negotiated" settlement, an outcome which indeed appears to be in the works.

5) Last but not least, Ogden Valley Forum has an interesting guest commentary up on its blogsite this morning, speaking to the issue of the continuing "back room" negotiations. We accordingly invite all interested WCF readers to take a look:

• Guest Post From Frank C. - HB 218 Questions

In closing we'll say that while we still maintain the position that the "Powderville" problem will never be permanently solved until the Powder Mountain Town Incorporation issue is unequivocally and irrevocably taken off the table, we'll nevertheless resist the temptation to forcefully editorialize on this point this morning, but instead defer, at least for the time being, to the hopefully sound judgment of those parties who are far more intimately involved in the negotiations than we.

"A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush," as the old saying goes. So we'll recognize the possible wisdom in this old folk ax, cool our jets at this juncture and wait to see how it all shakes out in the days to come. The very last thing we'd like to see at this stage of this exceedingly fragile existing situation, would be to find ourselves being blamed for throwing a wrench into the works.

And what say our gentle readers about all this?

Powder Mountain Update: Time For The Lumpencitizens of the "Demo" Persuasion To Unleash "The Full Court Press" - UPDATED

Its time to edumacate a couple of seemingly backward UTAH Demo Senators/Senate Committee Members who are seriously confused about the local "Powderville" issue, wethinks

For those readers who are just logging on to Weber County Forum right now, you probably haven't heard the bad news. As we reported in our earlier WCF article of this morning, Gage Froerer's politically bi-partisan HB 218 got stalled in committee today, when the two Democratic Party Senators on the committee, (of all people whom we'd assumed would would naturally "cross the aisle" and approve this bill in committee, and vote in support of Sen. Jon Greiner's motion to give the bill a favorable recommendation, and to move it forward,) inexplicably pulled the rug out from under the "Powdervillians, and stalled this bill with their mind-boggling "nay" votes.

Time's running short here, People. Rep. Gage Froerer informed your WCF blogmeister this afternoon that HB218 will again return to the the Senate Government Operations & Political Subdivions Committee for a new vote again tomorrow morning at 8:00 a.m.!

In this connection we'll urge all Utah Democrats amongst our WCF readership to chime in now on this subject... Yes RIGHT NOW. Be sure to trot out your official Demo credentials, especially if you serve as a Demo Executive Committee Member, or as a state or county DEMO delegate, or as any other Democratic party Mucky-muck.

Its time to edumacate a couple of seemingly backward UTAH Demo Senators/Senate Committee Members who are seriously confused about this local issue, wethinks:

Here are the contact links to Democratric Party Mssrs. McAdams and Robles, the ones who blindly missed (or ignored) the "Powderville citizens' call to action" in re today's committee vote, and in an extremely cowardly and "bootlicking" way, joined forces with neoCON GOP "develop at all costs" leadership"in taking the legs out from under" Rep. Gage Froerer's HB 218:

• Ben McAdams (Democrat, so-called)
• Luz Robles (Democrat, so-called)

Don't let the cat get your tongues, our Utah Democratic Party-affiliate friends.

Be sure to contact Mssrs. McAdams and Robles, and "splain to them exactly 'wha'sup.'"

Update 2/26/10 8:24 a.m.: We just received this somewhat cryptic missive from Rep. Froerer, re the scheduling of today's followup committee hearing, (for which we'd hoped to provide more live audio this morning):

Not on the agenda for this AM. We are expecting a letter from the Developers that would stay the litigation and the incorporation if this does not happen we will request to go directly to the Senate Board. I am waiting to hear from the County.

We'll have to confess we don't quite know what to make of this. Perhaps however, that heretofore elusive "settlement/development agreement" -- (the one which would "resolve" this whole kerfuffle) -- is hastily coming to fruition in some obscure Weber County Commission back room... even as we speak [wink].

House Bill 218: Live Audio From This Morning's Senate Committee Session - UPDATED

Listen up , folks; and monitor the results of your handiwork, as Rep. Froerer's HB 218 bill appears as the first item on this morning's 8:00 a.m. Senate Government Operations and Political Subsdivisions Standing Committee agenda
UPDATE: Bad News... HB 218 stalls in committee by a tied 3-3 vote

For the benefit of those readers who'd like to listen in on this morning's Senate Government Operations Committee hearing, wherein Rep. Gage Froerer's H.B. 218 (Municipal Disincorporation Revisions) is item #1 on the committee calender, we're once again pleased to offer a live audio link. If all goes according to plan, the below audio link should automatically go "live" around 8:00 a.m.:

• realPlayer Audio (Pre-recorded)
• MP3 Audio (Pre-recorded)

(We've now replaced the "live" link with the above recorded copies, for those who'd like to listen in after the the hearing is completed.)

We'd also like to again thank our many readers who submitted their supportive emails to Rep. Froerer and SGOPS Committee members during the last few days. Thanks to your vigorous efforts, the a hefty volume of correspondence reached the desks of the six committee members.

Listen up , folks; and monitor the results of your handiwork!

Update 2/25/10 9:00 a.m.: Bad news, people. After considerable lengthy testimony and discussion, this bill has now stalled in committee. Senator Liljenquist's motion to hold the bill for further study failed, due a tied 3-3 vote. Senator Greiner's subsequent motion to pass the bill on to the full Senate then likewise failed by the same vote tally. According to Chairman Knudsen however, there will be one final opportunity to bring this bill back for further committee deliberation during the current legislative session, which means that we citizen-lobbyists have further work cut out for us.

The three Senate committee members who voted in opposition to moving this bill forward... Liljenquist, McAdams and Robles.

Looks like it's back to the drawing board, folks.

Gage Froerer's HB 218 is Finally Assigned to Senate Committee

If ever you are to chime in on the "Powderville" situation... the time should be NOW!

Okay, Gentle Weber County Forum readers:

Query: What do we like @ WCF more than hard-core political activism?
Answer: MORE hard-core political activism! Doh.

And speaking of that, here's the latest news about Rep. Gage Froerer's HB 218:

Gage's bill has now been assigned to the Senate Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Standing Committee, for 8:00 a.m, on Thursday, which committee hearing will be the last procedural hurdle before it's moved onto the Full Senate, for an up/down vote.

It's a pretty favorable committee assignment for Rep. Froerer, actually, we believe, with the likes of Weber County-friendly Senators Jon Greiner and Scott Jenkins sitting on the committee. But considering serious neoCON Senate opposition to HB 218, this committee assignment still remains far from a Gage Froerer slam-dunk.

Those of us who'd like to restore voting rights to the harried "Powdervillians" therefore can't take anything for granted, even at this juncture. The last thing we'd like to see would be to have this bill killed in Thursday's committee hearing.

So... we'll once again call upon our faithful readers, the Utah lumpencitizens, just as we successully did before, to once again chime in on this subject, and to lodge with this Senate Committee your ever-savvy comments on this subject.

In that connection, here's our new Senate Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Standing Committee contact link page which we've put together for that very purpose:

• 2010 Senate Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Standing Committee contact link page

Don't let the cat get your tongues, O Gentle Ones. Even if you think you're sometimes internet tongue-tied... please don't hesitate to click on the link and throw in your own two-bits this go-round.

If we sit on our thumbs at this juncture, the "Powdervillians" will predictably be screwed.

If ever you are to chime in on the "Powderville" situation... the time should be NOW!

Have at it, O Gentle Ones.

More Powder Mountain Ink... This Time From the Deseret News

We don't know why some folks still don't "get it;" perhaps they just don't want to get it

The Salt Lake print media devotes more ink to the Powder Mountain Saga this morning, with this Deseret News story, which briefly summarizes the facts leading to the introduction in the legislature of Rep. Gage Froerer's HB 218, which (as DNews reporter Rebecca Palmer aptly notes) seems to be "held up on Capitol Hill [the Senate] despite hard lobbying by the local state representative and support from county officials":

• Developers pushing to create town in Ogden Valley

While this morning's story in many respects reflects a respectable gum-shoe reportorial effort, with its sizable collection of presumably hard-gotten and pithy lumpencitizen quotes, we believe the Deseret News nevertheless misses the main point. Whereas Rep. Froerer has carefully framed his bill narrowly, as remedial legislation to cure a gross legislative error and to re-establish citizen voting rights, the tone of this morning's story not-so-subtly drifts back to that tired old theme, which seems to pop up so regularly in stories written by reporters who've only superficially covered the "Powderville Town" issues... i.e., that this is a garden variety "Developer v. Environmentalist" story.

Exhibit "A": Check out the photo in the center column, which carries this hopelessly misleading notation:

Jim and RuthAnn Halay are members of a group of approximately 120 home-owners and residents who are resisting the development of their Weber County area by Powder Mountain Resort.

We've said it before and we'll reiterate: Rep. Froerer's HB 218 is a voter rights bill, and NOT an anti-development bill! We honestly don't know why some folks (even hard-working reporters) still don't seem to understand the issues at stake.

Perhaps Ms. Palmer (and others who still don't seem to "get it") ought to check out the audio from the 2/5/10 House Government Operations Committee hearing wherein Rep. Froerer carefully spells it all out:

...by most estimates, by most estimates I've seen, if this incorporation was to take place, and would require those citizens to wait two years, the infrastructure that would be necessary to be put in place, we all know the cost to set up city government, would increase the property tax burden on a very small group, approximately a hundred people, somewhere between fifty to seventy-five percent, unless some deal was made by the incorporator. So what you're saying, by forcing them to wait the two year period of time,you could very well see property tax averages for this small group of people, right now on their single family homes, that probably average between twenty five to three-thousand, to increase to five thousand to maybe up to seven thousand dollars for that same home, just because of that incorporation, not because of additional services that would be provided by that community.

Significantly, this morning's DNews story didn't even mention the economic issues which are ever so closely tied to the "right to vote."

Yes, it's all about voting rights, people; but we mustn't forget that voting rights stem fundamentally from the core American principle that there shouldn't be "taxation without representation." (This aforementioned principle is of course even more primarily derived from the common sense "core" American notion that "hapless property owners ought not have their tax bills capriciously jacked up 'between fifty to seventy-five percent' by their self-absorbed, greedhead neighbors, without at least having some say in the matter.")

We don't know why some folks don't "get it;" perhaps they just don't want to get it.

Take it away, O Gentle Ones. It's been uncharacteristically quiet here at Weber County Forum over the past few days.

Standard-Examiner Editorial: OUR VIEW: Secession, Anyone?

We gotta once again say that we're mighty impressed with the upgrade in quality of the SE's editorials, since Doug Gibson took over for Don Porter

We have a suggestion for Sen. Stephenson, or maybe Rep. Carl Wimmer, R-Herriman, or Rep. Curt Oda, R-Clearfield, Or Sen. Margaret Dayton, R-Orem, or Rep. Mike Noel, R-Kanab, or any of their ideological clones: secede from the United States. That would send a message to the federal bureaucrats. No longer would they say, "Oh, it's another resolution from those Utah pols!" They'd have to listen this time.

Standard-Examiner
OUR VIEW: Secession, anyone?
February 21, 2010

Fantastic "tongue in cheek" morning editorial editorial from the Standard-Examiner (we're assuming it's tongue in cheek) criticizing the 2010 legislature's mealy-mouthed, piecemeal "Message Bill" approach to its apparent 2010 legislative project, i.e., thumbing its nose at the federal government:

• OUR VIEW: Secession, anyone?

Yes Gentle Readers, "the silly season" is again upon us this election year, with the usual glut of half-assed "message bills," full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."

So what say our Gentle Readers about this? So long as we're chafing under the heavy federal yoke, shouldn't our legislature stop merely nibbling around the edges... and just wholeheartedy go for broke?

But legislators, if you want to truly be independent of the federal government, stop taking so much of its money. It might be quite difficult to make up some of the lost cash, but hey, you'd be the inaugural Legislature of the new nation of Utah. You control the purse strings. You can make the legislative decisions.
And they won't have to be "message" resolutions -- they'd be for real.

Touche', SE Editorial Board... a hit! A most palpable hit! Why should our legislature limit itself to insipid political posturing, when it could could go for the whole enchilada?

We gotta once again say that we're mighty impressed with the upgrade in quality of the SE's editorials, since Doug Gibson took over for Don Porter.

So what say our gentle readers about all this?

Update 2/21/10 1:00 p.m.: While we're on the subject of 2010 "message bills," don't miss this morning's Deseret News column, wherein Mssrs. Pignanelli and Webb cheerfully opine on this topic:

• 'Message' bills: Are they important or a waste of time?

And who will be the first of our WCF readers to comment?

Salt Lake Tribune Editorial: Powder Mountain - Let the Citizens Have a Say

Time for the State Senate to finish "cleaning up" the Powderville voter disenfranchisement mess

... HB466, passed with little discussion at the end of the 2007 legislation... "was a major screw-up."

Salt Lake Tribune
Rep. Kerry Gibson, R-Ogden
February 22, 2008

So far this [HB 218] is the only legitimate bill I've read about this year. Pass it immediately.

Salt Lake Tribune
Powder Mountain Editorial
Salt Lake Tribune reader comment #2
February 19, 2010

We're delighted to direct our readers' attention to this morning's strong Salt Lake Tribune editorial, urging the State Senate to finish the job of "cleaning up the mess" which the legislature created in 2007 with its "misguided" SB 466, and to relieve the civil rights injustice heaped upon the prospective Powderville" residents, "who were wrongly roped into the new town of Powder Mountain without their consent":

• Powder Mountain -- Let the citizens have a say

We've remained mystified that this story has for the most part escaped the attention of the Northern Utah media over the past three years (the Standard-Examiner excepted); so we'll therefore offer a Weber County Forum Tip O' The Hat this morning to the SLTrib for devoting important editorial page space this morning to endorsing a bill which at least one SLTrib reader has characterized as "the only legitimate bill I've read about this year."

Nice work, Salt Lake Tribune.

Hopefully, most State Senators had a chance to thoughtfully consider this strong and persuasive editorial over a nice hot cup of breakfast cocoa this morning, and that each of them will "choose the right," (just as their House legislative collegues already and unanimously did), now that this too-long-delayed remedial bill has been once again introduced for deliberation in the Senate.

Deseret News: Senator Liljenquist Cuts Public Safety Employees a Little Slack

Sen. Liljenquist's SB 63 will be amended to allow public safety employees to continue retiring at full benefits before other government workers

Here's an interesting Deseret News tidbit, following on the heels of our 2/15/10 discussion, regarding State Sen. Dan Liljenquist's SB 63, once again reminding us that its a good idea to lobby your legislators when their proposed legislation isn't quite up to snuff:

• Utah Legislature: Public safety may catch a break on retirement

Here's the lede from this morning's Deseret News story:

SALT LAKE CITY — A bill creating a new, less costly state pension system will be amended to allow public safety employees to continue retiring at full benefits before other government workers.
SB63 had called for all employees covered under the state retirement system to work 35 years to earn a full pension, even though police officers, firefighters and other public safety employees traditionally have been able to leave earlier.
Now, the bill will be amended to give public safety employees a full pension after 25 years. Other public employees, including schoolteachers and state workers, still would have to work 35 years under the bill.
Liljenquist said there's a policy argument to be made for a shorter retirement window for public safety employees. "Some of these professions are more of a young person's career," he said. [...]

We'll volunteer that we're in agreement with Sen. Liljenquist rationale respecting this proposed bill amendment, as we've been having trouble wrapping our brain around the concept of forcing geriatric cops and firefighters to stick it out for a full 35 years on the job, in order to draw their retirement.

Having said that, we'll also put the focus on another interesting quote contained within today's DNews story:

The head of the Utah Public Employees Association, Audry Wood, agreed. "I think we all understand, especially with firefighters, it's such a physical, high-demand job, and the burnout rate is high," Wood said.But Wood said she still opposes the dramatic overhaul being proposed and wants the state to take more time in redesigning the pension system.The change Liljenquist is making, she said, "just goes to show that moving so quickly reveals the flaws. Getting the extra year we're asking for, we can flesh out a lot of the issues."

So what about it, Gentle Readers? Is Sen. Liljenquist's late recognition that public safety jobs are essentially "...more of a young person's career," a step in the right direction for proposed legislation that was otherwise sound? Or is Sen. Liljenquist's bill simply "moving too fast," and in need of "further study," as Utah Public Employees Association spokesperson, Audry Wood suggests?

Our discussion of Sen. Liljenquist's proposed overhaul of the Utah public employee retirement system provoked a pretty good discussion the last time around; so in the interest of stimulating a little more discussion on this topic, we'll ask out readers this:

What do you all think about this latest news development?

Salt Lake Tribune: Utah Senator's Absence Let Retirement Overhaul Go Through

Ogden's part time police chief and part time state senator and full time retiree insists he was not dodging the vote

By Curmudgeon

Well, well, well... now it seems Ogden's part-time police chief [when the legislature is in session] is also a part time legislator. The Salt Lake Tribune reports that Sen. Greiner [R-Ogden] missed key votes in a Senate Committee recently that permitted bills to drastically alter the state's public employee retirement system to pass by a 3-2 vote:

• Utah senator's absence let retirement overhaul go through

Had Greiner been present and voted "nay" on two of the bills he is known to oppose, they'd have died in committee.

Why did Chief Greiner miss the votes? He missed one because he was instead attending a luncheon thrown by Utah Realtors. Here's the story's lede:

State Sen. Jon Greiner, the Ogden police chief who draws a public-employee pension, was notably absent from a pair of long and contentious hearings last week on historic changes to the state's retirement system.
Greiner said Monday he was unable to attend the meetings due to "previous commitments," including a Friday luncheon sponsored by Utah Realtors.

He missed the other vote because, he said, he was attending a meeting with constituents to discuss "excavation and blue stakes that mark underground lines." Ogden's part time police chief and part time state senator and full time retiree insists he was not dodging the vote. Uh huh. Right.

The committee's other five members were scheduled to attend the Realtor's lunch too... but they skipped it to show up at the committee meeting. Or to put that a little differently, they decided to do the jobs the taxpayers are paying them, as legislators, to do. Chief Greiner opted instead for a free meal.

And the beat goes on....

Standard-Examiner Editorial: Retirement Reforms Needed

An invitation to our board "experts" to "edumacate us" on these matters

This morning's Standard-Examiner again carries another strong editorial, this time applauding State Sen. Dan Liljenquist, R-Bountiful, for "his efforts in the Legislature to shore up Utah's state retirement system, which took a $6.5 billion hit from the recent recession":

• OUR VIEW: Retirement reforms needed

Senator Liljenquist has introduced two remedial public employee retirement bills in the State Senate, SB43 and SB63; and we believe the Standard this morning does a pretty good job of boiling it all down to the basics:

SB43 ends the odious, budget-busting practice of double-dipping, where a state employee covered by the retirement system collects both a paycheck and a pension. That is costing our state about $900 million over 10 years. It must end. [...]
SB63 moves employees hired after July 1, 2011 to a retirement system that de-emphasizes pension benefits and instead shifts the future risks of retirement from the state to the individual.

We've railed against the "odoriferous" double-dipping practice endlessly on Weber County Forum of course; so for what it's worth, we'll naturally join with the SE foursquare in strongly urging the passage of SB43. This one certainly seems to be a no-brainer... at least to us.

As for SB63, which would, as we understand it, essentially substitute a defined contribution plan in place of the current budget-busting defined benefit retirement system for all "new hires," we're still sitting on the fence, but strongly leaning in the direction of supporting this latter bill too.

In that connection, we believe the SE makes a pretty persuasive point with this:

[SB63]... transfers an economic reality to public employees that most private-sector employees have been dealing with for years -- that it's up to us to have a secure retirement. The days of a pension taking care of us are nearing the end.

So what about it WCF readers? Is it time for our state public retirement system to fall into place with the economic realities of the private sector? Or are there hidden nuances that operate in favor of taking a little more time studying this... or in even perhaps preserving the current system?

And we already know current public employees are already making lots of noise about this; but we're wondering what all the shouting is about, since these above Liljenquist-sponsored revisions would only ostensibly effect "new hires." We don't lay claim to having any particular expertise in matters concerning public employee retirement however, so we invite our board "experts" to edumacate us on these matters.

All WCF readers are invited to chime in, of course; but we'd particularly like to elicit come commentary from readers in the Utah public employment sphere.

Have at it, O Gentle Ones. The world-wide blogosphere eagerly awaits your ever-savvy comments.

Update 2/15/10 1:36 p.m.: Well, Lo and Behold, and in response to our reader invitation, we already have some extended commentary available (submitted via email) from retired Ogden Firefighter and former City Council Candidate Dirk Youngberg, who suggests that Sen. Liljenquist's SB63 needs a little more thought, and isn't quite ready for prime-time:

• Knee Jerk Reaction to the Market?

We'd hoped to provoke a robust response to this afternoon's WCF write-up, and indeed that seems to be exactly what we're getting!

Who will be the next to chime in on this topic and further contribute to our online enlightenment?

Gage Froerer's H.B. 218 Passes in the House By a Stunning 63-0 Vote

The next big battle (the biggest one yet) will be in the Senate, where the evil neoCON forces in the legislature have vowed to kill this bill in Senate Committee

Good news for the prospective "Powderville Town" residents today, as House Rep Gage Froerer's H.B. 218 passes in the House, by a unanimous 63-0 Vote!

So far, so good.

Check out the audio of today's House floor "debate" (such as it was):

• H.B. 218 House Floor Debate Audio (realPlayer audio)

Having passed the bill now in the House, the next big battle for Rep. Froerer (the biggest one yet) will be in the Senate, where the evil neoCON forces in the legislature have vowed to kill this bill in Senate Committee.

It's time to gird up our loins right now, gentle readers. We'll be calling for another vigorous citizen email onslaught very soon, just as soon as we find out which particular Senate Committee will be considering this bill.

As we did before, we'll also post and circulate a bulk Senate Committee email link, once this bill is assigned to a particular Senate Committee.

Gage has promised to keep us up to speed on this; and he makes it no secret that he'll need our further "steely-eyed" help.