Standard-Examiner: New Waterfall Trail Access Warning Irks Hikers

Uh-oh. Looks like our quirky neighbor directly  east (Chris Peterson) is on the warpath again. Be sure to carry your photo IDs people, if you're planning a stroll up (and down) Ogden's Waterfall Canyon. Then again...maybe not.

Here's veteran SE report Cathy McKtrick's lede to this morning's SE story:

OGDEN — Around noon Friday, a sign appeared at the 29th Street trailhead informing people to bring ID and acquire wristbands if they intend to hike the Waterfall trail. But within a few hours, it had been removed at the request of Ogden City.
When the check station at Waterfall Creek is staffed, Photo ID and a wristband will be required to ENTER or LEAVE Waterfall Canyon,”the sign said, listing www.OgdenFoothillPrivateLand.com as its reference. That URL diverts people automatically to a Facebook page bearing the same name.

Read up, peeps!

• New Waterfall trail access warning irks hikers

Here's the kicker once again, Ogden City residents, just in case you missed it.: "But within a few hours, it had been removed at the demand request of Ogden City."

The encouraging interpretion of this?  Peterson is painfully aware of his subject property's susceptibility to public prescriptive easement rights, which were established way back in the early 1900's, or earlier.

Our take? Mr. Peterson hasn't demonstrated such a public control-freak hissy-fit since 2012, by our reckoning:

• Standard-Examiner: Ogden Trails Open -- For Now -- Despite Fencing

1) Here's to wishing Chris Peterson (Earl Holding heiress's hubby) sound mental health, sometime in the near future.

2) Let's encourage Mayor Mike to sic our Ogden City Attorney (Gary Williams?) onto this case, to establish, once and for all, the legal nature of the rights of the public, regarding the trails east of Ogden.

Comments, please? O Gentle Ones?

Salt Lake Tribune: Utah Bill to Lower Costs for Records Requests Stalls in Committee

C'mon, folks there has to be some low threshold which even our government secrecy minded Utah legislative "critters" can tolerate, right?

Journalists and sometimes citizens alike are being priced out of the ability to check on government.

Sheryl Worsley, president of the Utah Headliners 
Chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists
Utah bill to lower costs for records requests stalls
February 4, 2014

Reasonable fees lead to reasonable requests. Some cranks request huge amounts of records on fishing expeditions, and it could worsen if they do not need to worry about costs.

Ogden City Attorney Gary Williams
Utah bill to lower costs for records requests stalls
February 4, 2014

Mr. Williams has been in the business of obstructing legitimate GRAMA requests for many years. As a result of his obstruction, Ogden ended up paying $10,000 in attorney's fees to one requestor (the Sierra Club, of which I was the acting official) a few years ago...
I suppose I'm one of the "cranks" that Mr. Williams is referring to.

Ogden City Political Watchdog Dan Schroeder
Utah bill to lower costs for records requests stalls (comment)
February 4, 2014

Pay through the nose
 to peek inside

Bad news for open government advocates, with this The Salt Lake Tribune Wednesday story, reporting that "opposition from cities stalled a bill Tuesday that would require local governments to cover the first $1,000 in costs for (Governmenent Records and Management Act ]GRAMA]) records requests whenever they are ruled to be primarily in the public interest":

• Utah bill to lower costs for records requests stalls

And yes, folks, as indicated by the highlighted quotes above, this is a story of particular local interest here in Ogden City, where examples of "public interest" GRAMA request obstructionism are "legion."

We'll be standing by with abated breath to learn whether Rep. King will succeed in bringing his HB242 back to committee with some kind of compromise, in a Utah legislative atmosphere which still remains, (shall we say) decidedly "public records request unfriendly".

Maybe a $500 "public interest" threshold, perhaps? C'mon, folks, there has to be some low threshold which even our government secrecy minded Utah legislative "critters" and elected municipal officials can tolerate, right?

Last Chance For Written Comments On 2d District Court Judicial Appointment

The deadline for written comments is 5 p.m. July 10, 2013

By: Blackrulon

Attention Weber County Forum Readers:

Nominees have been announced for the 2nd District bench seat, wherein Governor Herbert will fill the vacancy created by the retirement of Judge Michael L. Lyon, effective September 1, 2013. The nominees are Catherine S. Conklin, currently domestic relations commissioner in the Ogden district courthouse; Deputy Weber County Attorney Sandra L. Corp, former public defender now in private practice in Ogden; Robert L. Froerer; Weber County Attorney Dee W. Smith; and Gary R. Williams, legal counsel for Ogden City Corporation. 

Here's the full Standard-Examiner story:

• District judge finalists named

Written comments can be submitted to the 2nd District Judicial Nominating Commission:

Brian Namba, Chairman of the Nominating Commission
State Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice
P.O. Box 142330
Salt Lake City, UT 84114-2330
Email: monicataylor@utah.gov
Fax: 801-538-1024

 The deadline for written comments is 5 p.m. July 10, 2013.

Standard-Examiner: Ogden Gay Rights Ordinance Makes Progress

Has Boss Godfrey turned over a new leaf, and resolved to listen to other people's ideas... or should we chalk just this up as a one-time aberration?

The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

Terry Pratchett
Hot-shot British Writer

In a marvellous display of uncharacteristic open-mindedness, and after dawdling for some eight months, it appears that Boss Godfrey has now been finally persuaded to instruct Ogden City Attorney Gary Williams to draft up that anti discrimination ordinance which has recently been a topic of discussion here on Weber County Forum and at the Standard-Examiner. Ace Reporter Schwebke provides the full lowdown:

• Ogden gay rights ordinance makes progress

Who says you can't teach an old dog new tricks?

Although we've learned that Boss Godfrey has been under considerable fire on this issue from all points of the compass, we'd like to believe that Boss Godfrey didn't merely succumb to public pressure, but rather simply decided to Choose the Right.

So what about it, gentle readers? Has Boss Godfrey turned over a new leaf... and resolved to listen to other people's ideas... and to treat folks with differing viewpoints and lifestyles with respect... or should we just chalk this up as a one-time aberration?

We invite our readers to either comment on topic, or consider this an open topic thread.

Envision Ogden and the Standard-Examiner

The facts aren’t so simple.

By Dan Schroeder

In the aftermath of the ill-considered Facebook post by Standard-Examiner reporter Scott Schwebke, perhaps now is a good time to review the role that our local newspaper has played in uncovering the Envision Ogden scandal. How often have Ogden’s professional journalists been on the ball, and how often have they been out to lunch? The truth isn’t as simple as some people (on either side) would like to believe. Here is a chronological account...

12 February 2007: The Standard-Examiner announces the formation of Envision Ogden with a front-page article, four days after the fundraising dinner where EO raised about $50,000. The paper asks a lot of good questions (Who are EO’s leaders? What are you going to do with the money? What’s your position on the Gondola?), but gets few answers (Abraham Shreve and four anonymous “business leaders”; we don’t know yet; we’re not taking a position). Verdict: On the ball!

24 June 2007: A special “Road to Prosperity” section in the Standard-Examiner features a puffy article about Envision Ogden, with glowing commentary about EO’s web site, its two fundraisers (the February dinner and the June 15 Salomon Center grand opening), and the prospects of attracting more recreation businesses to Ogden. The article makes no attempt to explain the legal status of Envision Ogden, or to disclose the names of any of its leaders besides Shreve. Verdict: Out to lunch.

September 2007: The Standard-Examiner receives documentation that Envision Ogden is a 527 political action committee, and that the city had allowed it to use the Salomon Center for the June 15 event before that building was leased to Gold’s Gym and Fat Cats. The Standard-Examiner decides that these facts are not newsworthy. Verdict: Out to lunch.

16 October 2007: The Standard-Examiner prints a front-page article reporting that City Attorney Gary Williams has written a letter to mayoral candidate Susan Van Hooser, accusing her of violating the prohibition on use of city-owned equipment for political purposes. Her crime? One of her campaign volunteers sent out a mass email to a publicly available list of Chamber of Commerce members, and this list included several Ogden City email addresses. Verdict: Out to lunch.

Late October 2007: The Standard-Examiner learns that Envision Ogden has contributed $1500 to city council candidate Blain Johnson, but decides that this isn’t newsworthy, even though this money may have been raised at a city-owned facility (the Salomon Center). When asked why this is different from the Van Hooser email incident, Managing Editor Andy Howell explains that it’s a matter of whether anyone has taken “official action”: Obviously Gary Williams (who reports to Mayor Godfrey) has not taken any official action to challenge the use of the Salomon Center by Envision Ogden. Verdict: Out to lunch.

14 December 2007: The Standard-Examiner publishes its final article on the 2007 municipal election candidates’ financial disclosure statements. For the city council races the article reports only the total amounts raised by each candidate, with no mention of the astonishing fact that Blain Johnson and Royal Eccles received a majority of their funds from the previously unknown “Friends of Northern Utah Real Estate”. Verdict: Out to lunch.

23 February 2009: The Standard-Examiner refuses to print a guest commentary by yours truly, in which it is explained that Envision Ogden actually “spent $26,884 on the 2007 election, including some direct expenditures in support of the mayoral campaign and several large contributions to another entity that immediately forwarded the money to city council candidates.” Howell explains that the commentary is being rejected because it was written partly in response to an editorial, which apparently isn’t permitted except from authors who are the subject of the editorial. Nobody in the news department picks up on the tip that the allegations are documented in publicly available IRS records. Verdict: Out to lunch.

3 March 2009: Weber County Forum publishes full documentation showing how FNURE laundered over $20,000 of campaign contributions from Envision Ogden to candidates Johnson and Eccles. WCF also publishes a list of Envision Ogden’s major contributors, which include banks, hospitals, and the State of Utah. The Standard-Examiner takes no notice. Verdict: Out to lunch.

31 March 2009: After learning that City Attorney Williams has allowed Johnson and Eccles to amend their disclosure statements, and has thus pronounced the FNURE problem “cured”, and after a Salt Lake Tribune article on the same subject appeared on the web the previous afternoon, the Standard-Examiner covers these events in its first article on Envision Ogden since June 2007. Verdict: On the ball!

5 April 2009: The Standard-Examiner publishes an in-depth article on Envision Ogden, focusing on how several of its contributors were unaware that their donations could be diverted to political candidates. (This is the article that prompted the Attorney General’s office to open a criminal investigation.) Verdict: On the ball!

20 April 2009: The Standard-Examiner receives an emailed news tip (from yours truly) that the mayor’s office was involved in soliciting contributions for Envision Ogden. The tip is never acknowledged or acted upon. Verdict: Out to lunch.

23 April 2009: In its fifth article on Envision Ogden in less than a month, the Standard-Examiner reports that according to EO leader Abraham Shreve, “it was always the organization’s intent to support political candidates....” Verdict: On the ball!

28 April 2009: The Standard-Examiner publishes the second of two articles on a totally frivolous election complaint by Bob Geiger, intended to divert the public’s attention away from Envision Ogden and toward alleged campaign finance violations by former city council candidate Dirk Youngberg. Then, having trivialized the issue, the Standard-Examiner drops the Envision Ogden story for the next year and a half. Verdict: Out to lunch.

28 May 2009: When asked (by yours truly) why the Standard-Examiner has never reported on Mayor Godfrey’s connection to Envision Ogden, Executive Editor Andy Howell says he thinks “everybody knows” about the connection already, and therefore it’s not newsworthy. Howell also says he believes that the Envision Ogden story has run its course, so the Standard-Examiner won’t be printing any more articles on it unless there is some further official action. Verdict: Out to lunch.

10 November 2010: After the Salt Lake City Weekly tips them off to the state investigation, the Standard-Examiner prints a new article on Envision Ogden in which they finally inquire into Godfrey’s role. Godfrey admits that “he raised funds for Envision Ogden that he knew could be given to political candidates....” Verdict: On the ball!

16 November 2010: After obtaining the state investigation report through an open records request, the Standard Examiner prints an article summarizing the report and emphasizing that the investigation was “sparked” by the Standard-Examiner article of 5 April 2009. Verdict: On the ball!

So in summary, the Standard-Examiner deserves credit for printing quite a few articles about Envision Ogden over the last four years. They’ve broken essential new ground in several of these articles, most notably when they interviewed Envision Ogden’s contributors. At other times they’ve been just a short step behind the Salt Lake newspapers.

But on multiple occasions, the Standard-Examiner has refused to follow-through on its own reporting. Its initial article in February 2007 failed to answer the obvious questions about Envision Ogden’s purpose and leadership—yet the Standard-Examiner never asked those questions again. Its uncritical coverage during 2007 undoubtedly played a role in misleading contributors about Envision Ogden's true purpose. The 2009 coverage laid bare the organization's fraudulent activities, and raised the obvious question of how an unknown, unregistered organization was able to raise so much money so quickly—yet the Standard-Examiner never asked contributors who it was that had solicited their contributions. Even this month, rather than looking into the possible felony charges that Envision Ogden’s leaders might face, the Standard-Examiner chose only to ask the Lieutenant Governor’s office about possible minor violations of election laws.

The Standard-Examiner has also been consistent in its refusal to act on the basis of news tips from private citizens, or on the basis of reports on Weber County Forum—no matter how well documented. And now we know that some of their staff even hold us in contempt. Therefore, new developments in this story must apparently include “official action” before the Standard-Examiner considers them newsworthy.

This apparent policy is especially troubling because the Attorney General’s office declined to open any investigation into Envision Ogden until after it saw evidence of fraud in a Standard-Examiner article. If public officials won’t act until something appears in the newspaper, while the newspaper won’t print a story until public officials act, we have a serious chicken-and-egg problem. On more than one occasion, the Envision Ogden story has nearly died because neither the prosecutors nor the press wanted to be the first to stick their necks out.

But the story isn’t dead yet, and neither is the investigation. Whatever happens next, I’m confident that we’ll see further coverage in the Standard-Examiner.

No Humor In the Ogden City Hall Throne Room

A frustrated Boss Godfrey bears down on local online media

Here's something definitely disturbing for those who value a free press in Boss Godfrey's Amerika. We got this letter via snail-mail today from Ogden City Attorney Gary Williams, indicating that Weber County Forum has apparently struck a raw nerve with the ever-humourless Boss Godfrey:

• Gary Williams 12/11/09 Letter

It's evident that Boss Godfrey is a mite tee-ed of about these satirical parody posts, and that he possibly takes himself WAY TOO SERIOUSLY:

• Donny Dolittle's Election Parody Posts

Of course that's probably easy for us to say, since it's Boss Godfrey who's the butt of the joke.

You'd think a "man" in the public limelight like Godfrey could take the good with the bad. In the wake of last month's election defeat however, wherein Godfrey's two rubber-stamp realtor candidates got handed their ass, it looks like the little twit is now ready to play dirty.

We'll weigh our options as we contact Mr. Williams about this on Monday morning.

In the meantime we'll ask... is there any sentient being who didn't take these posts "tongue in cheek?"

Former Ogden Manager Seeks to Drop Lawsuit Because Boss Godfrey (and Gary Williams) Drove Him to the Poorhouse

Boss Godfrey beats down another righteous litigant from his ill-deserved, taxpayer funded bully pulpit

By Ogden Lover

Sad story on page 1 of yesterday's Standard-Examiner. Dean Martinez is dropping his lawsuit against the city because he's already spent $20K and is broke:

• Former Ogden manager seeks to drop lawsuit because of lack of funds

I know personally that part of the reason he is out of money is that when he applied for jobs outside of Ogden, Godfrey deep-sixed any chance he had of landing a job. Godfrey has done this to others as well.

Boss Godfrey's Latest Political Trick: Secret Non-public Candidate "Debates" -- UPDATED

Three City Council Candidates thwart Boss Godfrey's latest attempt to make a mockery of the democratic election process

UPDATE: Boss Godfrey has a change of meds... errr... heart

Ogden City municipal election clock ticks to within 38 days of the November 3, 2009 zero hour, Ace reporter Schwbeke reports this morning, (a mere two days after the release of Godfrey's bogus golf course survey) , on Boss Godfrey's latest attempt to make a mockery of the democratic election process. We learn from Mr. Schwebke this morning that agents for Boss Godfrey's Propaganda Television Station, Channel 17, staged a command performance taping yesterday, on the ninth floor of Ogden City Municipal Building, of a thinly-attended dog and pony show, which the Standard-Examiner politely calls a "debate":

• Majority of council candidates attend debate

Although some creative editor in a dark back room at the Std-Ex (cleverly adopting Mr. Schwebke's phrase "a majority of city council candidates") attempted to create the headline illusion that some form of "debate" occurred during yesterday's private taping, the truth of the matter, as reported by Mr. Schwebke, is that the only thing which may have resembled debate occurred in the the Ward 3 race, wherein incumbent Doug Stephens and challenger Patrick Dean both did obediently show up on command, to field a series of questions, carefully composed by Boss Godfrey's own employees at the TV Station. As to the other three races we wonder... did Godfrey's employees from the Godfrey Propaganda Channel have the audacity to go ahead and tape three "empty chair debates?"

We applaud the three council candidates, Blair, Garcia and Van Hooser, who politely declined the TV station's attempt to to possibly rig the election process. Apparently these candidates were wise to the hard lesson learned during by Ms. Van Hooser during the 2007 Mayoral election: If you appear for a taping in front of Boss Godfrey's Channel 17 television cameras, you can expect to find the taped footage mercilously sliced, diced and ginsu-knifed, with heavily edited segments broadcast constantly on the Mayor's Propaganda Station, and in even more far-flung places such as YouTube.

We believe these three candidates demonstrated considerable wisdom in holding out for legitimate debates, conducted by disinterested neutral parties, in venues where the general public can be in attendance. Hopefully all eight candidates for the four open city council seats will be hearing from more trustworthy debate moderators, such as the Weber County League of Women Voters, very soon.

We'll add that we were pleased that Mr. Schwebke at least saw fit to include paraphrased quotes from two of the candidate non attendees, explaining their rationales for declining to attend an event which had the makings of a Godfrey-style political ambush. We were even more delighted to read the emailed comments from Council "B" Seat candidate Bart Blair, which articulately explained some of Mr. Blair's reasons for giving this Channel 17 production the thumbs-down. Unfortunately, Mr. Schwebke's morning story provides only excerpts from Mr. Blair's emailed comment. For the benefit of those readers who'd like to read Mr. Blair's full response to Mr. Schwebke, check out the entry which Mr. Blair made to his campaign blog last evening:

• Channel 17 Debate - By Bart Blair

Maybe it's just us... but we'll ask the question anyway. Does it seem to our gentle readers that Mr. Schwebke's story left out Mr. Blair's most important and salient points?

That's it for now, O Gentle Ones.

Don't let the cat get your tongues.

Update 9/25/09 5;15 p.m.: We just received a Boss Godfrey Administration press release through the usual roundabout sources, (the Godfrey administration continues to leave WCF off its press release email list) revealing that the increasingly deranged Boss Godfrey, who's apparently been recently suffering from a particularly exceptional bout of grandiose manic madness, has finally decided to at least temporarily refrain from televising the three "empty chair 'debates,'" wherein candidates Blair, Garcia and Van Hooser refused to "participate" in Godfrey's sham Propaganda Channel #17 dog and pony show:

• Boss Godfrey Press Release: OGDEN CITY MAY NOT SHOW ALL DEBATES

We can only speculate about Godfrey's sudden reversal on this. Perhaps Gary Williams told Godfrey frankly that to air these one-sided segments would invite an ass-kicking in the courts. Perhaps Godfrey's handlers finally got him back on his much-needed medications. Who knows?

So what say our gentle readers about this?

Update 9/26/09 8:30 a.m.: This morning's Standard-Examiner carries a padded out version of the back-pedaling Godfrey Administration press release which we published as an update yesterday evening:

• Candidate no-shows may nean few debates on Ch. 17

While it's our opinion that it doesn't offer much beyond what we've already provided above, we'll let our gentle readers be the judges of that.

City Council Meeting Post Mortem; Godfrey Again Blows His Top

Boss Godfrey adds the term "outlaw" to his already eye-popping public resume

In the wake of last night's lively and uplifting council session, Scott Schwebke provides a City Council meeting post-mortem this morning, focusing mainly on Boss Godfrey's reaction to the council's 5-2 veto override vote. Sadly, the citizens of Ogden City are once again presented with the disturbing spectacle of a surly and emotionally out of control mayor, who this time announces his intention to willfully disobey the law:  

• Ogden overrides budget vetoes / Mayor says he won't comply with policies, calls them illegal

Godfrey is so wrong on so many counts that we hardly know where to start. Suffice it to say however that the council's budget policy language now remains intact, and that the new budget ordinance at this juncture carries the full force of law and the legal presumption of validity.

If Godfrey chooses to challenge the policy provisions of the ordinance through acts of civil disobedience, the legal burden will fall upon Godfrey to overturn the ordinance. If he chooses to wilfully violate the law and invite possible criminal sanctions, he does so at his own risk. "If you can't do the time; don't do the crime," as the old jailhouse axiom goes.

Hopefully our child-like Emerald City mayor will soon recover from his post-council session petulance, and rejoin the Emerald City political mainstream. If he does choose to challenge the ordinance in court, we believe he should do it the grownup way, by filing a civil lawsuit seeking injunctive relief. Hopefully City Attorney Gary Williams will take Godfrey aside, cease playing the part of Godfrey's "yes man" for at least a few minutes, and explain the realities of the situation. Yes, Godfrey's planned course of action does have a possible downside, inasmuch as it could conceivably land him behind bars.

That's our take; and we're stickin' to it.

Before closing, we'd also like to offer a hearty Weber County From Tip O' the Hat to the five city council members, Garcia, Gochnour, Jeske, Stephens and Wicks, who fulfilled their civic duty and did what was "right." We've had a passive and semi-dysfunctional city council in Ogden City for far too long, and it's exciting to see our city legislature re-embracing its lawful policy-making function and finally emerging as a truly co-equal municipal government branch.

Take it away, O Gentle Ones. There's much to discuss again this morning. Yesterday's comments section is growing a mite long and unwieldy. Time to fire up a new discussion thread, we think.

Scott Schwebke Fleshes Out the Boss Godfrey 2010 Budget Veto Story

Added bonus: Supplementary supporting documents

By Dan S.

Scott Schwebke's article on the budget veto, which WCF reported yesterday, is now up on the Standard-Examiner web site.

In addition, the S-E has posted a fascinating 13-page memo, outlining the mayor's legal arguments. It'll take some time for us all to digest this, but here are a few points:

1) The mayor is trying to veto the policy language on the MWC, Lorin Farr Pool, and golf courses without vetoing their actual appropriations. Whether he can do this is legally questionable, because his line-item veto applies only to appropriations. The memo cites some case law (from other states) on this question. However, putting aside the legality question, this tactic will make it harder for the council to find the votes to override the veto.

2) The mayor is claiming that the council must take a single up-or-down vote on overriding his veto, rather than separate votes on the three separate policy items. (His reasoning on this makes no sense to me at all.)

3) The mayor gives multiple reasons why he believes the policy language is illegal in the first place, under state law. We've heard most of these before. If the council doesn't override his veto, these legal issues will probably be moot for the time being. But make no mistake: The mayor is claiming here that he has the unilateral power to dispose of city recreational facilities, and that the council can do nothing to stop him.

Editor's addendum: A coupla added points:

1) Godfrey's memo also cites and relies upon a 1978 Utah Supreme Court decision, Martindale v. Anderson, an electronic copy of which we just happened to already have available on our storage site.

2) Notably, Mr. Schwebke also reports that the matter will be set for next week's Tuesday council calendar, although a possible override vote may not actually happen before early August:

The veto is set to be officially presented to the city council at its meeting Tuesday, said Bill Cook, the council's executive director. However, a vote on the veto won't likely occur until the council's Aug. 4 meeting, he said.

Although Mr. Schwebke doesn't provide information to account for this delay, we'll assume the time lag is intended to provide time for the Council's attorney, Mr. Hall, to review Mr. Godfrey's Gary Williams neoCON rants legal arguments and to prepare his own counter-memo.

Significantly though, the projected August 4 veto override date falls well beyond the July 15, 2009 municipal election filing deadline.

So, as we see it, that's just one more reason, we think, for civic minded Ogden Ward 3 residents to seriously consider filing for the Ward 3 council seat, in which council incumbent Doug Stephens presently stands unopposed. Our view is that it certainly wouldn't hurt to have a hungry Ward 3 council challenger or two looking over councilman Stephens' shoulder, (or breathing down his neck, as the case may be.)

Who will be the first to comment?

Important Planning Commission Meeting Set For Tomorrow (Wednesday) Night

The Planning Commission is called upon to deal with Water Horizons Project mission creep
Updated with newly submitted documents

This morning we'll provide our readers what we hope will be a timely heads-up on a couple of items set for tomorrow's Ogden Planning Commission agenda:

• 5:30 p.m. 3. Request to Amend Capital Improvement Plan, to allow construction of water tanks at 36th Street. (Attachment B) (Recommendation to:) City Council
• 6:00 p.m. 4. Conditional Use Permit/SA Review, for construction of a five-million gallon water tank at approximately 1800 E. 36th Street. (Recommendation to:) Final Action

As our regular readers are aware, as part of the City Council's Water Horizons project, our city council had originally approved the construction of a water tank at the top of 46th St, and pumping stations along the east bench. Early in the spring however, the council learned that its carefully crafted plan had suffered some characteristic Godfrey mission creep, and that Boss Godfrey was busily (and quietly) engaged in preparing to install $5-6 million water tanks at the top of 36th street instead. After some council-administration wrangling, (and a referral to city attorney Gary Williams), Mr. Williams advised that there was enough difference in what the Council had planned and approved, and what Godfrey was doing, that the matter needed to go to the Planning Commission for the issuance of a new conditional use permit (and a subsequent Council amendment of the city's Capital Improvement Plan.) Thus this matter is once again set for tomorrow's Commission agenda for "final action," after being continued from an earlier 6/17/09 commission hearing.

Early in the course of the development of this story, Boss Godfrey offered the excuse that there had merely been some unfortunate clerical confusion, and that the Council's approval of the tank at the top of 46th street had resulted from a typographical error, in a circumstance where the 46th street designation had been inadvertently substituted for an intended reference to 36th Street. Godfrey asserts that he didn't intend to misinform the Council, in other words.

Whether that's true we do not know. However, thanks to The Standard-Examiner, we do have some interesting new information. According to Ace Reporter's Schwebke's 6/29/09 (yesterday) story, the construction of the tanks at 36th street are "justified" by new engineering reports, and other circumstantial factors which would make a top of 36th street location a more favorable choice. That's what Godfrey's mouthpieces are telling us, at least.

As for the content of those new reports, we all remain in limbo. During our most recent discussion of this matter, there were at least three reports sitting on Gary Williams's desk, awaiting his review, in connection with Dan Schroeder's pending GRAMA request.

Whether Dan is now in receipt of these documents we do not know. Hopefully he'll be able to provide electronic copies for display here on WCF however, in advance of the Commission's Wednesday evening hearing.

Of course we already know the real reason Boss Godfrey prefers the 36th Street location.

That's it for now, gentle readers. We hope at least a few of you will put tomorrow's Commission session on your calenders, even though we lumpencitizens (yeah, the ones who pay all Godfrey's bills) will walk into tomorrows meeting (hopefully with steely eyes and torches/pitchforks in hand,) essentially blind to the necessary and relevant"report" information.

Thursday Morning Emerald City News Roundup

2009 City Council election preview; Ogden scores $ 1 Mil for the Ogden River Project

We'll highlight two news stories from the Standard Examiner this morning, both of which relate to topics regularly discussed here at Weber County Forum:

First, Ace Reporter Schwebke provides us partial preview of the upcoming 2009 council race, and pins down the present intentions of the four council incumbents whose terms will expire at the end of the year:

• Jesse Garcia - Intends to run for another term
• Doug Stephens - Intends to run for another term
• Dorrene Jaske - Undecided
• Blain Johnson - Undecided

Of the two undecideds, it seems to us that Johnson would be the most vulnerable to being knocked off, in the event he decides to make another run, for at least a couple of reasons.

First problem: The FNURE/Envision Ogden scandal. While Gary Williams refuses to prosecute, and Johnson is still playing it "cute," you'd better believe this as yet unresolved issue will be a heavy political burden for Mr. Johnson to bear during the short 2009 municipal election sprint.

Second problem: Johnson's dismal council meeting/work session attendance record. When Johnson was sworn in as our At-large seat "A" council member in January of 2008, we asked how a busy young practicing lawyer could manage to fulfill the duties of an Ogden City council member, in what amounts to a full-time job. The answer of course: he can't. In fairness to his Ogden constituents, (and to his own clients,) we thus call upon Mr. Johnson to step aside, and make room for another candidate with the time and energy necessary to properly fill the very demanding council role. In the event he does choose to run, he can well expect to be hammered hard on these issues, and in our view, his prospects for re-election don't look so hot.

As for Councilwoman Jeske, we're hoping she'll make the decision to run again, assuming her doctor gives her the green light. She's been a voice of council prudence and reason over the past 3-1/2 years, and a keystone for our current council of "grownups." If she runs, she'll win, wethink.

In other news, Mr. Schwebke reports this morning that Ogden City has made a significant "score," with yesterday's approval of a $1 million Water Quality Board grant, earmarked for the rehabilitation of a polluted mile long downtown section of the Ogden River.

Great news for Ogden wethinks.

It will be up to our city council of grownups, of course, to make sure that this money isn't blithely frittered away on some other "visionary" Godfrey project.

That's it for now, Folks.

Who will be the first to comment?

Update 6/25/09 8:50 a.m. MT: Be sure to also check out Dan's #1 comment in the lower comments section. He's highlighted several more morning news stories, and added significant new material to broaden this morning's discussion.

Council Approves FY2010 Budget With Specific Earmarks For the Marshall White Center and Lorin Farr Swimming Pools

Council Attorney: "Boss Godfrey is obligated to follow City Council policy."

By Bill C.

One very intriguing city council budget session at City Hall. Turned into a showdown; and this time the Council didn't even blink.

As we all know, the Marshall White Center was at the center of all this; and I must say the Council truly shined.

The budget portion opened with Bill Cook giving a presentation that clearly defined the roles of the Mayor and Council in our form of government, with emphasis on the the Council's duty to set City policy. He then explained that the Mayor is obligated to follow all City policy, by statute. Since the budget is an ordinance, the Council included a clear statement of City policy with regards to the funding of the Marshall White Center, including intentions of providing a pool as well as all current levels of service.

As the discussion progressed, the mayor began to filibuster. This included of course his usual assault on Jesse with his claim that the Council had been informed all along the way, for about 20 minutes. Finally Amy impressed on him that in order to get anywhere they must move on. After a couple more interruptions by the mayor the discussion progressed. When the mayor next interrupted, he again made threats and warnings that the Council was heading for a train wreck.

Finally, when the discussion was clearly focused on the legality of what was being discussed, the Council's own lawyer, Craig Hall, came to the podium. Not only did he explain the law regarding the Council's proposed action, he questioned the legality of how the mayor conducted this contract, pointed out how the mayor didn't follow proper procedure and that the city attorney Buck Froerer made mistakes with the contract. Gary Williams couldn't counter, so he proceeded to ask for an opinion on the hypothetical assumption that had everything been done properly, and due to the fact that the contract had already been signed, what takes precedent. "Policy," said the council's attorney... "the mayor is obligated to follow City Council policy."

After more discussion, in which Brandon Stevenson made a complete lackey of himself, the Council voted on the amendment which earmarked full funding to the MWC for the fiscal year 2010. The amendment passed.

For good measure, Caitlin offered another amendment along the same lines for the Lorin Farr pool, also earmarking funds as a matter of policy... it also passed.

You can be very proud of your Council tonight folks.

Two other things of note: Gary Neilson (Golds Gym) spoke about how the city should not compete with the private sector when it come to non essential services. Funny he never offered to extend a deal at a reduced rate to the affected seniors or poor that make up a significant portion of the clientele of the MWC.

And last but not least, I rather doubt Schwebke will mention that the mayor included in his threats, on more than one occasion, how much this will "cost the residents" if the Council goes through with this.

In his narcissistic, egocentric and petulant state of being, he went after the people of Ogden. They'll pay for this, he said.

Sweet.

Update 6/17/09 7:15 a.m. MT: Don't miss Scott Schwebke's own post-meeting writeup over on the Std-Ex live website, which gentle reader WACWB linked in the lower comments section during the wee hours:

• Godfrey: Council on collision course / OWCAP to manage Marshall White, to receive $337,450 from Ogden

All in all, we believe that Mr. Schwebke did a pretty good good job of laying out the facts and capturing Boss Godfrey's anger and angst, now that the council has drawn a firm line in the Emerald City political sand. Once again we hope our readers will also mosey on over there to lodge a few savvy remarks.

Update 6/17/09 9:27 a.m. MT: The Deseret News is following this story too:

• Ogden Council fully funds Marshall White Community Center, expects veto

Have at it, O Gentle Ones...

Emerald City Council Double Header

The FY2010 city budget and campaign financing disclosure ordinance revisions return to tonight's council calender
Added bonus: Live blogging from the Emerald City Council chamber!

We'd like to remind our readers of two important items set for tonight's special city council meeting agenda:

• FY2010 City Budget. Consideration of the proposed budget for the Fiscal Year July 1, 2009 to June 30, 2010. (Continue/not continue public hearing to June 16, 2009 – voice vote)
• Campaign Financing Disclosure. Continued consideration of Proposed Ordinance #2009-39 (as tabled and amended from June 2, 2009) amending the Ogden Municipal Code by amending Chapter 8 of Title 1 to revise campaign financing disclosure requirements. (Adopt/not adopt ordinance – roll call vote)

Now that Boss Godfrey has inked a management contract with the non-profit OWCAP, it will be fascinating to observe how the council deals with the mayor's proposed zeroing out of 2010 funding for the Marshall White Center. Will the council just roll over, or are the council and mayor still poised for a showdown?

The campaign finance disclosure matter was put over from last week's meeting, so the council could re-draft the heavily flawed version which was drafted by our heavily-conflicted Godfrey lackey City Attorney Gary Williams. We'll of course make every effort to obtain an electronic version of the re-drafted ordinance, for posting under this article as an update, prior to tonight's meeting.

We hope a significant number of WCF readers will put tonight's meeting on their calenders and attend this event.

Our city council deserves all the citizen input and support that they can get.

Don't let the cat get your tongues.

Update 6/9/09 5:45 p.m.: Dan S. is now sitting in the council chamber, and will attempt to "live blog" here, via his iPhone. This technology worked extemely well the last time Dan experimented with it; and hopefully our readers will stay tuned in and find the info he provides to be both timely and informative.

How to Lawfully Conceal the Source of Campaign Contributions

A modest proposal from one Ogden citizen

By Dan Schroeder

Imagine that I decide to run for city council this fall. To run a competitive campaign, I figure I’ll need about $25,000. Now I certainly don’t have enough time, or enough friends, to go around and raise that kind of money locally. Fortunately, I won’t have to, because I do have one donor who is willing to fund my campaign all by himself: Osama Bin Laden.

Now some might object to this scheme, but in fact it’s completely legal. Ogden’s campaign financing ordinance puts no limits on the size of contributions, nor does it prohibit contributions from foreign nationals.

The ordinance does, however, require that I disclose the source of my campaign funds. The idea, I guess, is that the voters have a right to know where my money is coming from. But if, for some reason, I don’t want the voters to know that my campaign is being funded by Osama Bin Laden, I can get around that in any number of ways.

The first and easiest way is simply to ask Osama to wait until late October before sending me the money. Then I won’t have to report his contribution until several weeks after the election. I can easily get most of my vendors to wait until late October before being paid, and if I need a little money sooner than that, I can just lend it to my campaign and pay myself back after Osama’s check comes in.

But that’s just the beginning. I can do much better.

Instead of having Osama write me a check directly, I can ask him to send the money to my Aunt Rose, a dear woman who would do any favor I asked. Aunt Rose will then write me a check in her own name, and I’ll report her as the source of the $25,000 campaign contribution. Then the voters will never find out where the money really came from. And according to the city attorney, this is still completely legal.

If I’d rather not bring poor Aunt Rose into it, I could instead form my own political action committee, or 527 organization as it’s known to the IRS. I think I’ll call it My New Underground Revolutionary Ensemble, or MNURE for short. I’ll never have to register this organization with the state or the city, or tell anyone at all who MNURE actually is. To avoid IRS disclosure rules I’ll have to ask Osama to limit his contribution to only $24,999. Then he writes a check to MNURE, MNURE writes a check to me, and nobody ever learns where MNURE got the money.

A variation on this scheme would be for MNURE to run my campaign on its own, paying my vendors directly. Then the voters would never even learn how much money I raised or spent. Ogden’s ordinance technically does prohibit this variation, but that part of the ordinance is unenforceable because the government can’t take away MNURE’s First Amendment right to get involved in a political campaign.

Finally, if I don’t like any of these schemes, I could simply lie: I could report that I got the money from Aunt Rose when it really came from Osama Bin Laden. Unless a citizen tracks down Aunt Rose and gets her story, I’ll never get caught. And even if I do get caught, all I have to do is amend my disclosure statement at that time and the problem will be cured--at least according to our city attorney’s interpretation of the current ordinance.

Of course that interpretation is a pure fabrication on the city attorney’s part, and at least the revised version of the ordinance that’s now before the council clarifies what the law really says. However,under the new proposed version, the city attorney would never be under any obligation to review or respond to a complaint that I’ve lied about the source of my money. And if the city attorney eventually does get around to prosecuting me, my crime is a mere infraction, punishable by a fine of no more than $500.

In the unlikely event that I’m faced with such a fine, I’m sure that my friend Osama would be happy to reimburse me for it.

Editor's note: Dan informs us that he delivered a slightly abridged version of this proposal during the Public Comments portion of last night's city council meeting. All council members were in attendance except Blain Johnson. Also in attendance were John Patterson and Gary Williams.

Update 5/27/09 8:04 a.m. MT: Today's Standard-Examiner has a brief overview of the proposed revisions to the city's ordinance:

• Ogden council puts campaign finance reform on the table

Update 5/27/09 10:13 a.m. MT: Gentle Reader Dan also has a short article on this topic on own blog this morning. It seems that City Attorney Gary Williams is a mite lite in the humor department, especially when it's he who's the butt of the "joke":

• Laughing at Politics

Who will be the first to comment?

Councilwoman Jeske Sets the Record Straight Yet Again

At least one Ogden City Council member has the sack to address citizen issues directly. Where we ask... are the rest?

One fantastic Councilwoman Jeske Update follows in the paragraphs below... for those readers who are concerned about Boss Godfrey's 36th Street Water Tank Fetish... and other mind-numbed Godfrey priority fetishes...

Here's a most excellent Dorrene Jeske response to the concerns of another well-respected WCF reader, (all of which was earlier-buried in an article comments section below).

From Councilwoman Dorrene Jeske this morning:

The Council has taken some steps on the water tank construction at the top of 36th St. The Administration started the construction using funds from the water tank and pipe lines project at the top of 46th St. We asked for an amendment to CIP and project. Administration said that an amendment wasn't needed. We asked Gary Williams for his opinion and he told the Administration that there was enough difference in what was planned and approved and what they are doing that it needed to go to the Planning Commission and that is where it is right now. The Council will have the opportunity then to approve or disapprove the project.
Council leadership is showing more backbone than it ever has since I've been on the Council. Amy and Caitlin are proving to be a great and strong team.
Be patient. Government policies and procedures require that proper process is followed and everything takes so much time that it seems like everything is moving in slow motion.
Last night at our work meeting, we met with the department directors and heard their reports and future plans. John Arrington explained why it looks like the golf course cost the City more than $400,000. during FY2009. I'm sure that the Mayor will use this as an argument for letting a private party manage the golf course. Mr. Arrington explained that in 2007 no payments were made to the debt service accounts. He said that through better management of the golf course that past two years, Mount Ogden has improved its revenues and its financial picture. Mr. Brenkman told us that public support has been heart-warming, and they were in the middle of their first tournament this year and it is a success.
He informed us that Ogden High's Girls Golf team used the course as its home course and had taken State two years in a row. But he also said that it was discouraging to answer the phone and have people surprised that they were still open because of the controversy surrounding its future. They would benefit from some positive publicity for a change.
He said that everyone who were participating in the tournament were amazed with the improvements made and what a beautiful "gem" it is. Those who haven't played the course for years have vowed to return! The volunteers have made fantastic improvements in such a short time.
He said that they were able to purchase 20 new golf carts which has really helped because so far this year they haven't had to turn anyone away.
They are proceeding with three planned projects to make the course more playable. Mr. Brenkman said that this year is Mount Ogden's 25th anniversary and he has scheduled a fundraising tournament for June 20th.
-Dorrene Jeske.

We''ll comment in passing that it's great to have Councilwoman Jeske boldly setting the record straight once again, and once again offering her newest comments, just as she does fairly regularly here on Weber County Forum. With the exception of Chair/Councilwoman Wicks, who posts her own comments semi-regularly, sadly, we haven't heard from any of the others at all.

Where better to communicate with the Ogden voters than here at WCF, we humbly ask?

There's room for council improvement here too, wethinks. Of course, that opinion may well be that of "just us." We admit we're biased. We believe our elected government officials should keep in close touch, and that WEBER COUNTY FORUM is just the place to do that.

Comments, pleaz...

Std-Ex: Youngberg Didn't Violate Campaign Finance Ordinances

Expect an upcoming Godfreyite claim of factual equivalency between the Youngberg matter and the the much more complex Envision Ogden fact scenario

The Standard-Examiner carries a story this morning, reporting on one of the more predictable developments in the ongoing Envision Ogden Money laundering Saga. Ogden City Attorney Gary Williams has considered the complaint of Godfrey loyalists Mr. Geiger and Mr. Gullo, weighed the evidence and found no violation of campaign finance ordinances on the part of former city council candidate Dirk Youngberg:

• Youngberg 'didn't violate' ordinance

Read the full text of Mr. Williams' opinion letter here:

• Gary Williams 5/9/09 Letter

Now that Mr. Williams has disposed of this frivolous Godfreyite sideshow, it seems to us that it would be incumbent upon our Ogden City Attorney to broaden his investigation, and take another look at what we deem to be the "main events," such as the blatantly anonymous contributions to the Eccles and Johnson campaigns through the shadowy anonymous entity Friends of Utah Real Estate, and the questionable use of the Salomon Center for a Godfreyite campaign fundraiser. We won't hold our breath for this however, inasmuch as it's become apparent that Mr. Williams won't look into such matters on his own initiative. Perhaps one of our gentle readers will pick up the ball, and nudge Mr. Williams along, by lodging a new complaint requesting a thorough examination of these issues.

The ludicrous downside to this latest development is quite clear at this juncture, of course. Now that Williams has disposed of the Youngberg complaint, and exonerated everyone (for the time being, at least,) the Godfreyite loyalists will claim a factual equivalency between the Youngberg matter and the the much more complex and labyrinthine Envision Ogden scenario, wherein several troubling issues remain as yet entirely unresolved.

In short, every effort will be made henceforth by Godfrey and his allies to sweep the Envision Ogden story under the rug.

And what say our readers about all this?

Std-Ex Letter: Campaign Finance Disclosure Means Transparency

Assuming for sake of argument that Johnson and Eccles could theoretically "cure" the inaccuracies in their earlier financial disclosure statements by the subsequent filing of amended statements, such cure remains nevertheless incomplete

We'd like to direct our readers' attention to this Jan Hamer letter to the editor, which was posted to the Standard-Examiner live website yesterday, stirring the pot once again on the Envision Ogden money laundering scandal:

• Campaign finance disclosure means transparency

For purposes of this morning's discussion, we'll cut to the chase and incorporate this key paragraph, which argues that Ogden City Attorney Gary Williams needs to take another look at this situation, and re-examine the conduct of the involved parties from a slightly different angle:

The point of campaign finance disclosure is transparency: voters have a right to know who is giving financial support to candidates for office. The Ogden City Code forbids anonymous contributions and contributions made by one person in the name of another (Section 1-8-3 B and C). Either FNURE exists and is effectively anonymous, since no records have been found and no one who might know will give names, or it is a fiction that existed only on paper for the purpose of passing money from Envision Ogden to candidates for office. Either way, both the spirit and the letter of the law have been violated. Section 1-8-7 of the Code provides that any person violating any provision of the chapter is guilty of a Class B misdemeanor and no person convicted thereof shall be permitted to take or "hold the office to which the person was elected..." I think the City Attorney should take another look at this. [Emphasis and links added].

Jim Hutchins also hit this nail squarely on the head, and framed the issue in his comments to the city council on April 21, 2009:

Yet, we have a situation where an organization, Friends of Northern Utah Real Estate, received money ($20,700) from Envision Ogden and paid out the same amount of money (minus $10) to two candidates for office, Councilman Johnson and Mr. Eccles. Yet, no one seems to be able to name any of the people involved with Friends of Northern Utah Real Estate. If no one in the organization has a name, is that not an 'anonymous' organization making an 'anonymous' donation? [Emphasis added].

Even assuming, for the sake of argument, that Johnson and Eccles, through the filing of amended financial disclosure statements, might theoretically "cure" the inaccuracies in their earlier filings under applicable principles of law, such a cure would yet remain incomplete in this instance. FNURE has neither filed a fictitious business name statement, nor registered as a PAC. So far as we can tell, FNURE has made no filings with the IRS, or publicly registered in any manner so as to disclose the true identities of its "members." Adding insult to injury, Eccles and Johnson have in fact actively suppressed the names of the true FNURE "donor(s)." If FNURE can't be characterized as an anonymous donor under present circumstances, it's difficult to contemplate who could ever be regarded as anonymous in any instance.

In its present posture therefore, the shadowy FNURE entity, (and the people behind it, if any other than Mr. Johnson himself) still remain no less anonymous than they were the day before the filing of the amended disclosure statements; and Mr. Johnson and Mr. Eccles thus arguably remain in violation of Section 1-8-3.

Perhaps some enterprising soul will take it upon him/herself to file a new complaint with Mr. Williams. We're dying to find out how Williams will obfuscate his way out of this problem.

And yes. We believe the council does need to immediately initiate its own investigation on this, either by appointing an investigative committee as Mr. Hutchins suggested, or by acting to appoint a special prosecutor. We hope they'll get on the stick.

And what say our gentle readers about all this?

2009 Emerald City Municipal Election Poll

WCF reader query: How will the Godfrey cabal fund its city council candidates in 2009?

Sharp-eyed readers will note that we've made an addition to our right sidebar this morning. At the suggestion of one of our gentle readers, we've put together a poll, focusing on the 2009 Emerald City municipal election, which is looming just six months hence. Perfect suggestion for an otherwise slow news day, we think. In light of the recent Envision Ogden money laundering scandal, and the percipient injection of possible federal stimulus funds into the Ogden City treasury, our submitting reader has composed this series of timely and and highly probative queries:

How will the Godfrey cabal fund its city council candidates in 2009?
• Federal stimulus funds, laundered through Envision Ogden and FNURE
• RAMP grant plus creative accounting
• Stuart Reid shakes down BDO tenants yet again
• Gary Williams opens a sidewalk stand at the Farmer's Market, selling cures for all ailments
• All of the above
• Other (insert your own suggestion)

We invite all readers to click the link below to cast their votes. Alternatively, navigate to the "ballot" in our right sidebar:

• Take the 2009 Municipal Election Poll

We haven't run a poll in quite a long while. Hopefully our readers will all participate and help generate data which will prove useful as the 2009 municipal election fast approaches.

Reader comments are invited, of course.

Have at it, O Gentle Ones.

Breaking: Salt Lake Tribune - Corruption in the 2007 Ogden Municipal Election? - UPDATED

One member of the Northern Utah print media finally picks up on the Envision Ogden money laundering story

UPDATED: The Standard-Examiner also belatedly gets into the act, with its own story appearing on its live website late last evening

Good news for those of us following the series of Envision Ogden political corruption stories which Dan S. earlier provided in our robust Envision Ogden Article Collection (scroll down). At long last a member of the Northern Utah print media has finally picked up on the story. Check out the just now breaking Salt Lake Tribune/Chris Smart writeup below:

• Ogden city attorney: Campaign funding problem 'cured'

Interesting legal theory that Ogden City Attorney Gary Williams advocates. If one of Boss Godfrey's friends submits a false campaign financial disclosure statement, and then sits on it for seventeen months, the problem is miraculously cured by suddenly filing a truthful statement.

Notably, It's now been five weeks since the Standard-Examiner rejected Dan Schroeder's proposed op-ed on this subject:

• Campaign Finance Reform Needed Right Here in Ogden - A Guest Commentary that the Standard-Examiner refused to print

Hard to believe it took so long to get this far. But persistence does pay off. Any bets on how long the Std-Ex will continue to ignore this story?

We'll urge our gentle readers to get involved in this story, and to post their own remarks in the comments section under this SLTrib article. If you're not already registered to post in the SLTrib comments section, please do so. It takes about thirty seconds, tops.

Now that this story is out in the open, it's important to make sure that it doesn't get buried again.

And when you get done posting on the Trib website, don't forget to leave a few comments here.

Update 3/31/09 7:30 a.m. MT: Too funny. After completely ignoring this story for over five weeks, the Standard-Examiner hurriedly published its own Scott Schwebke writeup on its live website last night, only hours after publication of the above Salt Lake Tribune story. Shamed into it, we guess. Here's the link:

• Ogden city attorney: No action, campaign finances amended

In this connection, we urge our gentle readers to visit the Std-Ex site and to offer your ever-savvy comments there, for the benefit of the Std-Ex's online readers. Unlike the Tribune site, which requires a rudimentary online registration process, the Std-Ex site permits immediate posting under your chosen screen name, hampered only by a simple and user-friendly word verification system, designed to screen out bot-generated comments spam.

Have at it, O Gentle Ones.

What a pleasure it is, to see this story finally out in the open.