Governor Herbert may not be required to break out his "veto pen" after all; and at least one lame-brained Utah legislative "message bill" stands to get "killed" before it becomes a national embarrassment.
Good news from the Salt Lake Tribune this morning for opponents of Utah House Rep. Jake Anderegg's ill-considered HB391, which would in the final days before the close of the 2013 legislation session summarily "shut off the possibility of tapping into federal funding for expanding Medicaid to cover an estimated 131,000 uninsured, low-income Utahns," and additionally thwart Governor Herbert's better-reasoned approach of carefully studying the Affordable Care Act's true fiscal impact by means of an already-commissioned cost/benefits study to be conducted over the course of the next few months.
Although this bill successfully sailed through the State House yesterday by a lop-sided 46-27 margin, amidst much "weeping, quoting of scripture and other asinine tea-party-style fanfare," a similar fate does not await the bill in the Senate, about which Trib columnist Robert Gehrke remarks that the bill has "landed" with a resounding "thud":
"I’m not advocating for Medicaid expansion. I’m advocating for: Let’s follow a timeline. Let’s follow a process. We have three more years to make a decision. Why do we want to make it in the last three days of the session?" said Senator Todd Weiler (R-Woods Cross) in a statement following yesterday's Senate Republican closed caucus, in which there was "no support for the bill," according to Senate Majority Leader Ralph Okerlund, (R-Monroe)
Weiler added that he doesn’t expect Andregg's bill to get heard on the Senate floor, but he's drafted amendments "just in case it does," which "would allow the state to expand Medicaid after the completion of a state Department of Health-commissioned study of the issue and a report from the Health Systems Reform Task Force on Utah’s charity care system," in direct contradiction to the provisions of Anderegg's HB391.
It thus appears at this juncture, if all goes well, that the Governor Herbert may not be required to break out his "veto pen" after all, and wonder of wonders; at least one lame-brained Utah legislative "message bill" stands to get "killed" before it becomes a national embarrassment.
Wednesday, March 13, 2013
Tuesday, March 12, 2013
City Council Notes: Paris Cafe Teen Social Club Zoning Ordinance Amendments Calendered for Tonight - Updated
Given our Ogden City Council's predilection to offer a "helping hand" to dang near any ambitious Ogden entrepreneur who "shows up on the Council doorstep," they wouldn't deny Mr. McKown's relatively innocuous rezoning request, would they?
As a followup to Saturday's Weber County Forum story, we're delighted to report that Ogden entrepreneur Earnie McKown's efforts to engineer a zoning "use" ordinance amendment consistent with his plan to host live band performances at his Harrison Plaza Shopping Center-situated Paris Cafe are already bearing preliminary fruit.
Mr. McKown's zoning amendment matter is now set for tonight's Ogden City Council "Special Session" agenda, in which connection we link this evening's council packet (see, 4a. CSR - Amendments to Lodge and Social Hall Definitions) :
The new proposed ordinance provides new definitions to the terms “Lodge” and “Social Hall” and "provides conditions for the approval of the Social Hall use in the C-1, C-2, and C-3 zones," as is more particulrly set forth in the link below.
By our own quick glance at the above-linked checklist it appears that Mr. McKown's proposed use will neatly conform to all rules governing his two-day-per-week "live music social club" venue, including the requirement of C-2 zoning, which already exists.
While we're reticent to prematurely to call it a Council "slam dunk," we're highly encouraged by Mr. McKown's prospective legal posture as he prepares for tonight's council discussion and vote. Given our Ogden City Council's predilection to offer a "helping hand" to dang near any ambitious Ogden entrepreneur who "shows up on the Council doorstep," they wouldn't deny Mr. McKown's relatively innocuous rezoning request, would they? Mr. McKown's proposed amendment already enjoys the blessings of both Planning Directer Greg Montgomery and the City Planning Commission, after all.
You can attend tonight's Council session to night to find out. The meeting starts at 6:00 p.m. Otherwise check back with us in the morning.
Update 3/13/13 4:50 a.m.: This morning's Standard-Examiner reports that the Council, in what we'd describe to be a remarkable but all-too-typical display of bureaucratic micro-management and over-caution, has put this matter over for another two weeks for additional "discussion," to include further nit-picking on the question of "what time is suitable for the cafe to close at night." Significantly, (and without any reported corresponding opposition,) "[s]everal Ogden residents, nearby business owners and Paris Cafe patrons stood before the council Thursday night, voicing their support for live music." That "testimony," along with Greg Montgomery's and the City Planning Commission's above-mentioned favorable recommendations, ought to have been sufficient to get Mr. McKown's revised business plan back on track, or so it seems to us.
Beneath this morning's story one liberty-loving S-E reader hits the nail squarely on the head regarding the Council's inexcusable dawdling on this matter, a sentiment which we'll also cheerfully adopt as our own:
"Come on Ogden city; enough is enough with all the damn rules! Let the man have music and make money. So much for freedom huh? I'm pretty sure it won't bother anyone living around that area." -enoughwithrules
As a followup to Saturday's Weber County Forum story, we're delighted to report that Ogden entrepreneur Earnie McKown's efforts to engineer a zoning "use" ordinance amendment consistent with his plan to host live band performances at his Harrison Plaza Shopping Center-situated Paris Cafe are already bearing preliminary fruit.
Mr. McKown's zoning amendment matter is now set for tonight's Ogden City Council "Special Session" agenda, in which connection we link this evening's council packet (see, 4a. CSR - Amendments to Lodge and Social Hall Definitions) :
The new proposed ordinance provides new definitions to the terms “Lodge” and “Social Hall” and "provides conditions for the approval of the Social Hall use in the C-1, C-2, and C-3 zones," as is more particulrly set forth in the link below.
 |
| Paris Cafe - C-2 Zoning |
While we're reticent to prematurely to call it a Council "slam dunk," we're highly encouraged by Mr. McKown's prospective legal posture as he prepares for tonight's council discussion and vote. Given our Ogden City Council's predilection to offer a "helping hand" to dang near any ambitious Ogden entrepreneur who "shows up on the Council doorstep," they wouldn't deny Mr. McKown's relatively innocuous rezoning request, would they? Mr. McKown's proposed amendment already enjoys the blessings of both Planning Directer Greg Montgomery and the City Planning Commission, after all.
You can attend tonight's Council session to night to find out. The meeting starts at 6:00 p.m. Otherwise check back with us in the morning.
Update 3/13/13 4:50 a.m.: This morning's Standard-Examiner reports that the Council, in what we'd describe to be a remarkable but all-too-typical display of bureaucratic micro-management and over-caution, has put this matter over for another two weeks for additional "discussion," to include further nit-picking on the question of "what time is suitable for the cafe to close at night." Significantly, (and without any reported corresponding opposition,) "[s]everal Ogden residents, nearby business owners and Paris Cafe patrons stood before the council Thursday night, voicing their support for live music." That "testimony," along with Greg Montgomery's and the City Planning Commission's above-mentioned favorable recommendations, ought to have been sufficient to get Mr. McKown's revised business plan back on track, or so it seems to us.
Beneath this morning's story one liberty-loving S-E reader hits the nail squarely on the head regarding the Council's inexcusable dawdling on this matter, a sentiment which we'll also cheerfully adopt as our own:
"Come on Ogden city; enough is enough with all the damn rules! Let the man have music and make money. So much for freedom huh? I'm pretty sure it won't bother anyone living around that area." -enoughwithrules
Salt Lake Tribune: Utah Lawmakers Back Charity Care Instead of Medicaid Expansion
All seven Weber County based State Representatives vote to summarily deny Affordable Care Act expansion to 131,000 poor and uninsured Utah residents
Following up on yesterday's Weber County Forum writeup, the Salt Lake Tribune reports this morning that "[the] bill [HB391] that would prevent Medicaid’s expansion in Utah passed the House Monday by a wide [46-27] margin with urging from a family doctor who argued the health care solution for 131,000 poor and uninsured isn’t bigger government," (and we are NOT making this up) "but more charity":
"As a dedicated member of the predominant faith, I donate four hours a week to Boy Scouts....So what if I was assigned by my faith as a doctor to contribute four hours a week to charity care? What if the 3,000 doctors in the state were willing to do that?" said Rep. Michael Kennedy (R- Alpine), a family practitioner who sees patients at a University of Utah-owned clinic in Orem. "I would do it in a heartbeat. Would others do the same?...I believe they would."
Notably, wethinks, we find NO pending bill in the Utah legislature which would require Utah medical providers to "to contribute four hours a week to charity care," so we'll just chalk up Rep. Kennedy's above remark as a mere political non-sequitur.
Adding to the above alternate reality vignette we find this Utah House of Representatives gem, focusing on the House floor antics of HB391 sponsor Jake Anderegg (R-Lehi) for whom yesterday's House pre-vote "debate" devolved into something weirdly resembling a "visionary religious revival meeting":
Drilling down within the above list, Weber County residents, here are the names (for 2014 election day reference) of your local legislators who voted to summarily deny Affordable Care Act expansion to 131,000 poor and uninsured Utah residents:
Following up on yesterday's Weber County Forum writeup, the Salt Lake Tribune reports this morning that "[the] bill [HB391] that would prevent Medicaid’s expansion in Utah passed the House Monday by a wide [46-27] margin with urging from a family doctor who argued the health care solution for 131,000 poor and uninsured isn’t bigger government," (and we are NOT making this up) "but more charity":
"As a dedicated member of the predominant faith, I donate four hours a week to Boy Scouts....So what if I was assigned by my faith as a doctor to contribute four hours a week to charity care? What if the 3,000 doctors in the state were willing to do that?" said Rep. Michael Kennedy (R- Alpine), a family practitioner who sees patients at a University of Utah-owned clinic in Orem. "I would do it in a heartbeat. Would others do the same?...I believe they would."
Notably, wethinks, we find NO pending bill in the Utah legislature which would require Utah medical providers to "to contribute four hours a week to charity care," so we'll just chalk up Rep. Kennedy's above remark as a mere political non-sequitur.
 |
| Olde-timey religious love fest |
For a complete list of House representatives who joined in on yesterday's seeming olde-timey politico-religious love fest, bowed to currently faddish and twisted GOP ideological dogma and voted yea on this decidedly mean-spitited bill, we helpfully link, straight from the Utah Legislature's website, yesterday's final House vote tally:Crying and quoting scripture, Anderegg called upon providers to do more and upon corporations to divert money they spend on international charities to building and staffing clinics at home."So-called charity care is a viable option if you get the right people at the table," he said. "My vision is a vision of people, county by county, throughout the state hearing the call to action and stepping up to serve the least of these, our brethren."
Drilling down within the above list, Weber County residents, here are the names (for 2014 election day reference) of your local legislators who voted to summarily deny Affordable Care Act expansion to 131,000 poor and uninsured Utah residents:
- Brad L. Dee (R - Ogden)
- Gage Froerer (R - Huntville)
- Richard A. Greenwood (R - Roy)
- Lee B. Perry (R - Perry)
- Jeremy A. Peterson (R - Ogden)
- Dixon M. Pitcher (R - Ogden)
- Ryan D. Wilcox (R - Ogden)
Monday, March 11, 2013
2013 Utah Legislative Update: Herbert, Lawmakers Head for Showdown Over Medicaid Decision - UPDATED
Health care train wreck looms in the state legislature
Fascinating 2013 showdown looming between Utah's executive and legislative branches, as Utah House Rep. Jake Anderegg (R-Lehi) advances his HB391 out of committee and onto the State House floor for a vote scheduled for this very afternoon. Anderegg's bill is founded upon what we'll label the "Twin Towers of GOP Health Care 'Reason,'" i.e., 1) the purely ideological notion that all federal money is per se bad, and 2) 130,000 uninsured Utahns don't need the health insurance anyway, because people with "integrity" and a "willingness to work" (people like Anderegg, that is) can "make sure they can get things paid off," even without health insurance.
Legislative passage of this bill would of course deprive Governor Herbert of the opportunity of carefully study the pros and cons of "taking a slow, studied approach" as to the issue of whether to expand Utah's medicaid insurance program to include federal "Obamacare" subsidization of up to 100 percent, and would even more importantly, kill the Medicaid implementation of the Affordable Care Act in the State of Utah entirely.
Check out the full Standard-Examiner story here, which frames this showdown as something of a potential political train wreck:
Added Double Bonus: HB391 not only "comes with a warning from legislative lawyers that it is likely unconstitutional," but also Anderegg and his Utah legislative colleagues won't be personally effected by the bill's outcome anyhow, inasmuch as these fine, highly GOP-principled legislators (and their families) "receive health insurance through the state, which is heavily subsidized and primarily paid for by the taxpayers. The coverage lasts as long as they remain in office, until they reach the 10 year mark, after which they get to keep their taxpayer-subsidized coverage for life," as yesterday's most excellent Utah Political Capitol editorial carefully notes:
The floor's open, O Gentle Ones. So what about it? Will our Utah legislature stick with its continuing anti-federalism posturings and reject what amounts to a federal health care economic windfall? Or will our our state legislature adopt the sensible practical approach of House Rep. Dixon Pitcher (R-Ogden), who says, regarding a Obamacare, "At some point we’ve got to … say, ‘Yeah, we really did lose?’"
And if this bill actually does somehow successfully clear the legislature, will Governor Herbert have the political courage to wield the "veto pen and Just Say No?
Lotsa good questions to consider this morning, eh, folks?
Update 3/11/13 12:05 p.m.: Uh-oh. We just learned from our friends at Alliance for a Better Utah (ABU) that "46 members of the Utah House of Representatives just voted to refuse expansion of Medicaid and eliminate the Governor and public from the decision. This needs greater study and thorough public discussion."
We join ABU in recommending that you "contact Senate President Wayne Niederhauser, and ask him to oppose this unwise and mean-spirited bill," now that it's on its way to the State Senate:
[Rep.] Anderegg said he incurred "tens of thousands of dollars" of medical debt during a five-year stint without health insurance and said he told creditors, "I will pay what I can." He still owes $232. "People who think they cannot get coverage without [the Affordable Care Act], that's just not true," Anderegg said. "But it takes integrity, and it takes people who are willing to work and make sure they can get things paid off."
While we’re glad that Representative Anderegg, who lists his occupation on the legislature’s website as “sales manager,” was able to pay off his medical bill, it is absolutely inconceivable, and irrational, to expect those [with low incomes] to take on additional bills just so they can stay alive.
Fascinating 2013 showdown looming between Utah's executive and legislative branches, as Utah House Rep. Jake Anderegg (R-Lehi) advances his HB391 out of committee and onto the State House floor for a vote scheduled for this very afternoon. Anderegg's bill is founded upon what we'll label the "Twin Towers of GOP Health Care 'Reason,'" i.e., 1) the purely ideological notion that all federal money is per se bad, and 2) 130,000 uninsured Utahns don't need the health insurance anyway, because people with "integrity" and a "willingness to work" (people like Anderegg, that is) can "make sure they can get things paid off," even without health insurance.
Legislative passage of this bill would of course deprive Governor Herbert of the opportunity of carefully study the pros and cons of "taking a slow, studied approach" as to the issue of whether to expand Utah's medicaid insurance program to include federal "Obamacare" subsidization of up to 100 percent, and would even more importantly, kill the Medicaid implementation of the Affordable Care Act in the State of Utah entirely.
Added Double Bonus: HB391 not only "comes with a warning from legislative lawyers that it is likely unconstitutional," but also Anderegg and his Utah legislative colleagues won't be personally effected by the bill's outcome anyhow, inasmuch as these fine, highly GOP-principled legislators (and their families) "receive health insurance through the state, which is heavily subsidized and primarily paid for by the taxpayers. The coverage lasts as long as they remain in office, until they reach the 10 year mark, after which they get to keep their taxpayer-subsidized coverage for life," as yesterday's most excellent Utah Political Capitol editorial carefully notes:
The floor's open, O Gentle Ones. So what about it? Will our Utah legislature stick with its continuing anti-federalism posturings and reject what amounts to a federal health care economic windfall? Or will our our state legislature adopt the sensible practical approach of House Rep. Dixon Pitcher (R-Ogden), who says, regarding a Obamacare, "At some point we’ve got to … say, ‘Yeah, we really did lose?’"
And if this bill actually does somehow successfully clear the legislature, will Governor Herbert have the political courage to wield the "veto pen and Just Say No?
Lotsa good questions to consider this morning, eh, folks?
Update 3/11/13 12:05 p.m.: Uh-oh. We just learned from our friends at Alliance for a Better Utah (ABU) that "46 members of the Utah House of Representatives just voted to refuse expansion of Medicaid and eliminate the Governor and public from the decision. This needs greater study and thorough public discussion."
We join ABU in recommending that you "contact Senate President Wayne Niederhauser, and ask him to oppose this unwise and mean-spirited bill," now that it's on its way to the State Senate:
- wniederhauser@le.utah.gov
- (801) 538-1035
Saturday, March 09, 2013
Standard-Examiner: Feds Want to Shut Down Ogden Airport Control Tower
“It’s not good news. It’s not good news at all,” sez Ogden-Hinkley Airport Manager Royal Eccles
Amidst all the hoopla concerning Ogden-Hinkley Airport's recent expansion , and particularly with regard to the even more recent arrival of much-ballhooed commercial service by Allegiant Air, this morning's more than slightly unsettling Standard-Examiner story casts some troubling doubt on the commercial future of Ogden-Hinkley Airport, as upcoming and clownishly random federal budget sequestration spending cuts throw a monkey wrench into the grand plans and schemes of some rabid Ogden boosters. Here's this morning's bad news, Ogden City lumpencitizens, straight from the pages of our home-town newspaper:
"The federal government wants to shut down Ogden-Hinckley Airport’s one and only control tower, a move that officials say would be devastating to the airport’s future, particularly its commercial jet service," this morning's Standard-Examiner grimly reports.
“It’s not good news. It’s not good news at all,” sez Airport Manager Royal Eccles, in a truly masterful display of understatement.
If Ogden's tower closes, "Ogden-Hinckley faces the prospect of laying off all five of its air traffic controllers," according to yesterday's Salt Lake Tribune story:
Needless to say, this alarming news has set Ogden-Hinkley's airport officials scrambling:
"Eccles said he and other city officials are working feverishly to compile [information about how the closure of a particular tower will adversely affect the national interest”] and plead the airport’s case. Eccles said work is also underway to recruit the help of Utah’s Congressional Delegation," this morning's S-E story reassures its readers (as if Utah's congressional delegation actually has any real "political juice" whatsoever, regarding this political hot potato).
Something tells us that Mr. Eccles and his fellow airport cronies have an uphill fight in pleading that an Ogden-Hinkley tower closure would "adversely affect the national interest ,” inasmuch as both Hill Air Force Base and Salt Lake International Airport are conveniently situated a virtual stone's throw down the road. So perhaps it's time to pose the sodden (and pregnant) question:
Would it be prudent for Weber County Forum's old pal Royal Eccles to get to work compiling his own job resume, right along with his "national interest argument," just in case "circumstances" suddenly transform Hinkley Field from a booming intrastate commercial air traffic up-and-comer to a sleepy general aviation airport with neither a need a fancy control tower, NOR for a grossly overpaid Airport Manager?
Just a thought...
The sky is the limit. There are options to grow. The ability to bring people in and move people out at a (reasonable) cost is just great.
The best-laid schemes o' mice an' men Gang aft agley,
An' lea'e us nought but grief an' pain,
For promis'd joy!
 |
| Airport Bosters in HappierTimes |
"The federal government wants to shut down Ogden-Hinckley Airport’s one and only control tower, a move that officials say would be devastating to the airport’s future, particularly its commercial jet service," this morning's Standard-Examiner grimly reports.
“It’s not good news. It’s not good news at all,” sez Airport Manager Royal Eccles, in a truly masterful display of understatement.
If Ogden's tower closes, "Ogden-Hinckley faces the prospect of laying off all five of its air traffic controllers," according to yesterday's Salt Lake Tribune story:
Needless to say, this alarming news has set Ogden-Hinkley's airport officials scrambling:
"Eccles said he and other city officials are working feverishly to compile [information about how the closure of a particular tower will adversely affect the national interest”] and plead the airport’s case. Eccles said work is also underway to recruit the help of Utah’s Congressional Delegation," this morning's S-E story reassures its readers (as if Utah's congressional delegation actually has any real "political juice" whatsoever, regarding this political hot potato).
 |
| Ogden-Hinkley's Future? |
Would it be prudent for Weber County Forum's old pal Royal Eccles to get to work compiling his own job resume, right along with his "national interest argument," just in case "circumstances" suddenly transform Hinkley Field from a booming intrastate commercial air traffic up-and-comer to a sleepy general aviation airport with neither a need a fancy control tower, NOR for a grossly overpaid Airport Manager?
Just a thought...
Salt Lake Tribune: Ogden Man Claims His Business Will Die Without Live Performers
One man’s vision of creating a vibrant alcohol-free hangout for teens and live performers hinges on approval of a new social hall definition by the "usual" Ogden City bureaucrats
Just to get some discussion going this morning, we'll put the spotlight on an enlightening March 8 "local" story from the Salt Lake Tribune, reporting about one Ogden City entrepreneur's effort to rev up his start-up business, and breathe some life into the sorely dilapidated shopping center at Ogden's 31st and Harrison, amidst the ever-present backdrop of Ogden City mindless bureaucracy and time-and-energy-consuming red tape (although there does seem to be some "hope at the end of the tunnel"):
Boiling down Cathy McKitrick's 3/8/13 Trib writeup, we present for our Weber County Forum readers what we deem to be the essential facts:
Last fall, Earnie McKown began renovating a large building he leases in the old Harrison Plaza Shopping Center, where he performed building renovations and commenced operating an "alcohol-free hangout for teens" called Paris Cafe. Finding his initial format, involving "DJs, pool, 'specials' and a 'canned' music" wasn't cutting it financially, he cleverly modified his business model to feature "live" band performances, a tactic that immediately "took off." "Within three weeks," according to Mr. McKown,"my business doubled and I could start paying rent."
The "fly in the ointment" however, as the ever-competent Ms. McKitrick reports -- "Under current zoning, McKown can operate as a 'social hall' but is not allowed to host live entertainment."
After "a mystery somebody" "dropped the dime" on him, resulting in an Ogden City code violation citation, Mr. McKown then bravely, and in the highest entrepreneurial spirit, thereafter set forth on a battle with the Ogden City bureaucratic big shots, an effort which was at least temporarily frustrated when in October of 2012, "the Ogden Planning Commission voted 6-1 to deny his [request an amendment] of Ogden City' zoning ordinance, and a few weeks later the City Council unanimously concurred with that recommendation."
On a decidedly positive note for Mr. McKown however, the City Council did "leave the door open to revisit the vague social hall definition" at a subsequent time, and in accordance with this opportunity, Mr. McKown has thus feverishly set to work again, in cooperation with the city "planning" bureaucracy, to fashion a new Paris Cafe-friendly zoning ordinance, an effort which was most recently rewarded by a January 4-2 "favorable" Planning Commision vote. It's therefor all up to the council now to decide whether the eyesore Harrison Plaza Shopping Center property will experience a bright new revival, or revert to being essentially "boarded up," inasmuch as Mr. McKown has made it known that absent his new requested zoning code modification, he's fully prepared to pull up stakes and call it quits.
Needless to say, we'll be closely following this story as it develops; and we're keeping our fingers that this story will have an ultimate "happy ending."
But before closing this article out, we'll note that there's one interesting subplot to this story, O Gentle Readers, in connection with this aspect of the Trib facts which we've lifted from Ms. McKitrick's text:
That's it folks. So who'll be the first to throw in their own 2¢?
Just to get some discussion going this morning, we'll put the spotlight on an enlightening March 8 "local" story from the Salt Lake Tribune, reporting about one Ogden City entrepreneur's effort to rev up his start-up business, and breathe some life into the sorely dilapidated shopping center at Ogden's 31st and Harrison, amidst the ever-present backdrop of Ogden City mindless bureaucracy and time-and-energy-consuming red tape (although there does seem to be some "hope at the end of the tunnel"):
Boiling down Cathy McKitrick's 3/8/13 Trib writeup, we present for our Weber County Forum readers what we deem to be the essential facts:
 |
| Harrison Plaza Shopping Center |
The "fly in the ointment" however, as the ever-competent Ms. McKitrick reports -- "Under current zoning, McKown can operate as a 'social hall' but is not allowed to host live entertainment."
After "a mystery somebody" "dropped the dime" on him, resulting in an Ogden City code violation citation, Mr. McKown then bravely, and in the highest entrepreneurial spirit, thereafter set forth on a battle with the Ogden City bureaucratic big shots, an effort which was at least temporarily frustrated when in October of 2012, "the Ogden Planning Commission voted 6-1 to deny his [request an amendment] of Ogden City' zoning ordinance, and a few weeks later the City Council unanimously concurred with that recommendation."
Needless to say, we'll be closely following this story as it develops; and we're keeping our fingers that this story will have an ultimate "happy ending."
But before closing this article out, we'll note that there's one interesting subplot to this story, O Gentle Readers, in connection with this aspect of the Trib facts which we've lifted from Ms. McKitrick's text:
Ron Atencio, owner of Mojos — a[nother] thriving all-ages live music venue in downtown Ogden that opened in 2004 — serves on the city’s planning commission and was among the six voting against McKown’s initial petition.When, we ask, will our decision-making public servants (such as "ethically-conflicted" Planning Commissioner Attencio) ever learn that those in such positions who adhere to the highest ethical standards recuse themselves and don't vote on issues from which they, as potential business competitors, might derive clear financial benefit?
That's it folks. So who'll be the first to throw in their own 2¢?
Friday, March 08, 2013
2013 Legislative Update: Utahns For Ethical Government Needs Your Help Now - Updated
An Urgent Utahns For Ethical Government (UEG) Call to Citizen Action
For the benefit of those Weber County Forum readers who'd like to participate in a little last minute political action as the 2013 Utah legislative regular session draws to a close, we're delighted to incorporate some useful material received yesterday evening from our friends at Utahns For Ethical Government, who've identified some still-pending bills which we'll urge you to either actively support or oppose. In this connection we've taken the liberty of adding a couple of links to our own WCF article concerning one of these below-mentioned bills, i.e., Senator Stuart Reid's SB 66, which we briefly discussed yesterday.
Roll up your sleeves and gear up for action, O Gentle Ones, inasmuch as the "critters" up on Utah's Capital Hill are sitting on the edges of their seats even now, eagerly awaiting our readers' ever-savvy two cents' worth.
Here's the full text of the UEG's March 7, 2013 Call to Action, folks, which we now furnish (in slightly edited form) without any further ado:
Ask Your House Member to Oppose SB 66 Tightening Referendum Requirements
We can' overemphasize the importance of your taking immediate action to Kill this Bill!
For the benefit of those Weber County Forum readers who'd like to participate in a little last minute political action as the 2013 Utah legislative regular session draws to a close, we're delighted to incorporate some useful material received yesterday evening from our friends at Utahns For Ethical Government, who've identified some still-pending bills which we'll urge you to either actively support or oppose. In this connection we've taken the liberty of adding a couple of links to our own WCF article concerning one of these below-mentioned bills, i.e., Senator Stuart Reid's SB 66, which we briefly discussed yesterday.
Roll up your sleeves and gear up for action, O Gentle Ones, inasmuch as the "critters" up on Utah's Capital Hill are sitting on the edges of their seats even now, eagerly awaiting our readers' ever-savvy two cents' worth.
Here's the full text of the UEG's March 7, 2013 Call to Action, folks, which we now furnish (in slightly edited form) without any further ado:
----o0O0o----
LEGISLATIVE UPDATE:
The Welcome and Unwelcome Bills
The Welcome and Unwelcome Bills
The Legislature is in its final 6 days, and a few ethics-related bills deserve your immediate support. Another bill, SB 66, deserves your opposition. Please contact your legislator now; otherwise it will be too late. Each is described below.
Urge Support of House Bill 78 (Republican Kraig Powell's bill) to improve disclosure
Please ask your House legislator to support HB 78, which reduces the secrecy of legislative bills that are in process of development. HB 78 would require that when a request for legislation is made to the Office of Legislative Research, the legislator's name, the date, and a short title for the bill would be public information even if the content remains protected because it is in process and may change significantly. Such disclosure would provide more openness/transparency to the bill-making process and decrease the odds that citizens will be caught completely off guard by a bill that is introduced without warning in the final days of a legislative session.
Encourage Passage of Senate Bill 86 (Republican John Valentine's Bill for Review of Ethics Complaints)
Tell your state senator that you support SB 86, creating an Executive Branch Independent Ethics Commission. It is patterned on the Legislative Branch Independent Ethics Commission, so it is weak and will need amendments in the future, but it's a step in the right direction. It is a reaction to the potential ethical problems that have arisen with both Attorney General Swallow and Lieutenant Governor Bell.
Urge Release of House Bills on Campaign Contribution Limits
HB 311, introduced by Brian King (Democrat) and limiting the size of financial contributions to candidates, has been waiting in the House Rules Committee for HB 174, a similar measure by Rep. Kraig Powell (Republican), so that the bills can be merged into a bipartisan bill. Ask the House Rules Committee Chair and members to release these bills now--in time for action before the end of the session.
Ask Your House Member to Oppose SB 66 Tightening Referendum Requirements
SB 66, which tightens county and municipal referendum requirements, deserves your opposition. SB 66 has been passed by the Senate and has been maneuvered to bypass a House Committee hearing altogether, so it will move to the House floor for a vote without the benefit of the Committee debate and public input. We expect the bill to have a 2nd substitute introduced on the House floor that will try to reinstitute some of the worst provisions that were eliminated in the Senate. For instance, the 2nd substitute mandates that the required percentage of signatures be obtained in every geographic precinct (smallest unit of local government).
All versions of the bill make it more difficult for citizens to successfully place a referendum on the ballot to try to overturn a county or local ordinance. The bill requires a fiscal and legal analysis of the anticipated consequences of any referendum, which then can be placed in the voter information pamphlet without any corresponding right of rebuttal from the referendum sponsors. Such a requirement is missing from statewide referendum provisions. Although sponsors can appeal the accuracy of the analysis to the Utah Supreme Court, they must rebut the presumption of accuracy by "clear and convincing evidence"-an extraordinarily high standard for such a lawsuit.
The bill is being supported by the League of Cities and Towns and backed by pro-development groups who do not want to see their favorable land use and zoning changes subjected to challenge by voters.
PLEASE contact your House legislator immediately to convey your opposition to this bill in any of its various forms. All of them undermine the chance that citizens can successfully place a referendum on the ballot in county and municipal elections.
If you do not know the name of your own senator and representative, go to the bottom of the Legislature's home page and enter your street address and zip code, and hit Find. Next, you can find the phone numbers, email, and home addresses of your senator and representative by clicking, respectively, on Senate and then Roster and House and then Roster, both on the same home page.
Thank you for being interested in your state government and for considering making your voices heard at this important time.
Kim Burningham, UEG Chair, and Dixie Huefner, UEG Communications Chair
Update 3/8/13 7:49 a.m.: We've just now received by email, in the form of a 3/7/13 press release, more dire warnings from former Utah Republican National Committeewoman Nancy Lord's Utah lumpencitizen-friendly group, Save GRAMA.org, urging opposition to Senator Reid's Utah referendum-gutting SB 66 (as amended), which document we've now lodged in our WCF Archives:
Please read up, folks, and contact your legislators before Utah League of Cities and Towns lapdog Stuart Reid manages to sneak this bill to final passage in the Utah House of Representatives... without even so much as one single word of public comment.Update 3/8/13 7:49 a.m.: We've just now received by email, in the form of a 3/7/13 press release, more dire warnings from former Utah Republican National Committeewoman Nancy Lord's Utah lumpencitizen-friendly group, Save GRAMA.org, urging opposition to Senator Reid's Utah referendum-gutting SB 66 (as amended), which document we've now lodged in our WCF Archives:
We can' overemphasize the importance of your taking immediate action to Kill this Bill!
Thursday, March 07, 2013
Breaking: ACLU Launches Nationwide Police Militarization Investigation
Many concerned American citizens have been asking the question, "What the hell's happening with our formerly trustworthy American police agencies?"
Following up on yesterday's most encouraging Huffington post story, both the Standard and the Tribune report this morning that our local Utah American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) "affiliate" has apparently teamed up with its "parent" ACLU national organization, in the latter organization's "better late than never," nation-wide investigatory campaign to "determine the extent to which local police departments are using federally subsidized military technology and tactics that are traditionally used [only] overseas":
In the midst of the recent flurry of local and national stories exposing the disturbing trend toward a scenario where "American neighborhoods are increasingly being policed by cops armed with the weapons and tactics of war," we're delighted to observe the ACLU's much needed, albeit belated, high profile entry into this soon-to-be-blossoming political fray.
Many concerned American citizens have been asking the question, "What the hell's happening with our formerly trustworthy local police agencies?"
We'll incorporate with our hearty approval the summary comments from "Huffpo source" "Cheye Calvo, the mayor of Berwyn Heights, Md., who was the victim of a highly publicized mistaken raid on his home in which a Prince George's County SWAT team shot and killed his two black Labradors":
For starters though, we need an answer to the basic general question, we suppose:
Don't let your cat get your tongues.
Following up on yesterday's most encouraging Huffington post story, both the Standard and the Tribune report this morning that our local Utah American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) "affiliate" has apparently teamed up with its "parent" ACLU national organization, in the latter organization's "better late than never," nation-wide investigatory campaign to "determine the extent to which local police departments are using federally subsidized military technology and tactics that are traditionally used [only] overseas":
- ACLU wants info on ‘militarization’ of Utah police
- ACLU requests records from law enforcement agencies for number of times SWAT teams are used
In the midst of the recent flurry of local and national stories exposing the disturbing trend toward a scenario where "American neighborhoods are increasingly being policed by cops armed with the weapons and tactics of war," we're delighted to observe the ACLU's much needed, albeit belated, high profile entry into this soon-to-be-blossoming political fray.
Many concerned American citizens have been asking the question, "What the hell's happening with our formerly trustworthy local police agencies?"
We'll incorporate with our hearty approval the summary comments from "Huffpo source" "Cheye Calvo, the mayor of Berwyn Heights, Md., who was the victim of a highly publicized mistaken raid on his home in which a Prince George's County SWAT team shot and killed his two black Labradors":
"I wish the ACLU success," Calvo said. "And I suspect that once they force the police agencies to cooperate, they'll find that this problem is even more dramatic and pronounced than most people know. But then the question is, now what? Even if you can show that people are being victimized and terrorized by these tactics -- and to no good end -- if no one cares, then what does it matter?"Hopefully, with the full resources of the ACLU (and its affiliates) employed in focusing on this effort, we'll soon get to the bottom of this mess. Whether our government-compliant populace will ever find the political will to actually do anything about it is of course anybody's guess.
For starters though, we need an answer to the basic general question, we suppose:
Don't let your cat get your tongues.
2013 Utah Legislative Update: A Few More Selected Items of Pending Legislation
Time is short, so it’s a perfect chance to ram stuff through
As the Utah legislature approaches the final days of the regular 2013 Utah legislative session, we'll follow up our most recent Weber County Forum 2013 legislative-topical postings with a focus on a few more selected items of pending 2013 legislation. As Standard-Examiner columnist Charlie Trentleman wryly remarks in Wasatch Rambler column this morning , "The final days of the session are the best time to see those guys [Utah legislators] in full flower. Time is short, [so] it’s a perfect chance to ram stuff through."
Just to get the ball rolling, we'll note that the Standard carries a short item this morning, reporting that Ogden's City's very own beloved Senator Stuart Reid (R), in a spirit fully consistent with "ramming stuff through at the last minute," summarily canceled yesterday's regularly-calendered committee hearing on his much criticized "citizen's referendum reform bill" (SB66), so particularly irate citizens there to testify against it would get no chance to do so. Since all committee action ends in a day, the bill will next be discussed on the floor of the house when it comes up for passage. There will therefor be "no public input," one sharp-eyed WCF reader points out in a heads-up email this morning, "thanks to Reid's cancelling the committee hearing on it." Have at it, O Gentle Ones:
In other Reid-related news of course, this morning's Standard also reports that Senator Reid was not quite so dextrous with his (SB39), a bill which one web commentator labeled "Sex Ed for Parents (For All the Wrong Reasons)"' and was also roundly denounced by the Standard-Examiner. This bill, which got mercilously clobbered yesterday in the House by a lopsided 16-50 floor vote, also featured a curious floor transaction, the Standard informs its readers, wherein House sponsor, and Utah legislative "class clown" Rep. Jeremy Peterson, R-Ogden, in an unmatched exhibition of Utah State House dignity, "put an interesting spin on the vote after the tally was announced. Given the microphone for personal privilege, Peterson simply echoed “waa, waa, waa” to amused House members."
Notable too is Rep. Rebecca Chavez-Houck's HB 91, a bill which would drag Utah's elections (kicking and screaming?) into the 21st century, and into alignment with at least eight other (shall we say more "progressive") states, by "making it possible [for Utah lumpencitizens] to register and vote in Utah on the day of an election," according to this morning's Standard-Examiner:
So what about it folks? Does Rep. Chavez-Houck's HB91 have a snowball's chance in hell of making its way through the legislature and into the Utah lawbooks?
Nope. We don't think so either. Sadly, in view of recent disturbing politicl developments, the overall U.S. Republican legislative strategy, (and thus the Utah GOP legislative majority approach, wethinks) appears to revolve around reducing, and not increasing voter registration eligibility pools:
Moreover Ms. Chavez-Houck's legislative resume sports a dreaded "D," which obvious debility, as every Utah political wonk knows, is usually the kiss of death for any creative, intelligent, innovative and even highly "democratic" legislation originating from the "wrong" side of the political aisle.
Nope, whatever she does, we don't think Rep. Chavez-Houck has even so much as a "snowball's chance" of "ramming" this one through.
That's it for now, O Gentle Readers. Time again to throw in your own 2¢.
As the Utah legislature approaches the final days of the regular 2013 Utah legislative session, we'll follow up our most recent Weber County Forum 2013 legislative-topical postings with a focus on a few more selected items of pending 2013 legislation. As Standard-Examiner columnist Charlie Trentleman wryly remarks in Wasatch Rambler column this morning , "The final days of the session are the best time to see those guys [Utah legislators] in full flower. Time is short, [so] it’s a perfect chance to ram stuff through."
Just to get the ball rolling, we'll note that the Standard carries a short item this morning, reporting that Ogden's City's very own beloved Senator Stuart Reid (R), in a spirit fully consistent with "ramming stuff through at the last minute," summarily canceled yesterday's regularly-calendered committee hearing on his much criticized "citizen's referendum reform bill" (SB66), so particularly irate citizens there to testify against it would get no chance to do so. Since all committee action ends in a day, the bill will next be discussed on the floor of the house when it comes up for passage. There will therefor be "no public input," one sharp-eyed WCF reader points out in a heads-up email this morning, "thanks to Reid's cancelling the committee hearing on it." Have at it, O Gentle Ones:
In other Reid-related news of course, this morning's Standard also reports that Senator Reid was not quite so dextrous with his (SB39), a bill which one web commentator labeled "Sex Ed for Parents (For All the Wrong Reasons)"' and was also roundly denounced by the Standard-Examiner. This bill, which got mercilously clobbered yesterday in the House by a lopsided 16-50 floor vote, also featured a curious floor transaction, the Standard informs its readers, wherein House sponsor, and Utah legislative "class clown" Rep. Jeremy Peterson, R-Ogden, in an unmatched exhibition of Utah State House dignity, "put an interesting spin on the vote after the tally was announced. Given the microphone for personal privilege, Peterson simply echoed “waa, waa, waa” to amused House members."
Notable too is Rep. Rebecca Chavez-Houck's HB 91, a bill which would drag Utah's elections (kicking and screaming?) into the 21st century, and into alignment with at least eight other (shall we say more "progressive") states, by "making it possible [for Utah lumpencitizens] to register and vote in Utah on the day of an election," according to this morning's Standard-Examiner:
So what about it folks? Does Rep. Chavez-Houck's HB91 have a snowball's chance in hell of making its way through the legislature and into the Utah lawbooks?
Nope. We don't think so either. Sadly, in view of recent disturbing politicl developments, the overall U.S. Republican legislative strategy, (and thus the Utah GOP legislative majority approach, wethinks) appears to revolve around reducing, and not increasing voter registration eligibility pools:
Moreover Ms. Chavez-Houck's legislative resume sports a dreaded "D," which obvious debility, as every Utah political wonk knows, is usually the kiss of death for any creative, intelligent, innovative and even highly "democratic" legislation originating from the "wrong" side of the political aisle.
Nope, whatever she does, we don't think Rep. Chavez-Houck has even so much as a "snowball's chance" of "ramming" this one through.
That's it for now, O Gentle Readers. Time again to throw in your own 2¢.
Wednesday, March 06, 2013
2013 Utah Legislative Update: Utah House Says Tear Down the Zion Curtain
Added "fair and Balanced" bonus: The nitty-gritty core philosophy from the Sutherland Institute, one of Utah's more prominent and wacky Eagle Forum-style "think tanks"
As a followup to Thursday's semi-encouraging Weber County Forum writeup, both the Standard and the Tribune report this morning that "the Utah House has advanced" (by a lop-sided 63-11 vote) Ogden Republican Rep. Ryan Wilcox's HB 228, which would "repeal a mandate for restaurants to mix and pour alcoholic drinks behind a barrier," otherwiseaffectionately derisively known in Utah the dreaded "Zion Curtain":
The Standard chimes in this morning in with its own strong editorial too:
Although the Standard editorial headline pretty much says it all, and the full editorial neatly sums up most the common-sense arguments rationally supporting what ought to be the bill's slam-dunk passage, Rep. Wilcox's battle against the forces of backwards idiocy in the Utah legislature ain't over yet, as former Utah Senate President and Utah County's State Senator John Valentine (R) (and a surprising variety of his Senate cohorts) wait in the wings, poised to deliver a kill shot to Wilcox's bill once it arrives in halls of the Utah State Senate, Holy Senator-for Life Valentine's oft-unchallenged domain.
Assuming you've read and absorbed the Standard's above editorial, it's our great pleasure to deliver, in the interest of balanced coverage, the other side of the story. In that connection, here's the nitty-gritty core argument and philosophy from the Sutherland Institute, another of the more prominent and wacky Eagle Forum-style "think tanks," i.e,, those ivory-tower entities which evidently encourage and propel the "religio-fascist 'thinking'" of some Utah legislators, such as Valentine:
That's it for now, folks. So who wants to throw in their own 2¢? Better yet, having digested all the above arguments, pro and con, who wants to go out on a limb a predict the outcome for Rep. Wilcox's HB 228?
I think it's weird and I'm not a drinker. But I grew up away, not here in Utah. I always thought that was a little strange.
Utah House Speaker Becky Lockhart, Deseret News
Bill would remove 'Zion curtain' in Utah restaurants that serve alcohol
February 27, 2013
Bill would remove 'Zion curtain' in Utah restaurants that serve alcohol
February 27, 2013
It’s inappropriate for a personal religious belief to be the tool that violates the rights of others to conduct business in a fair, responsible manner. The Zion Curtains are a hindrance to common-sense business practices. They insult restaurant employees by making their jobs more difficult, and they insult customers by making a simple request for a drink with dinner look like something forbidden and shameful.
Removing the “Zion curtain” might make good sense for a variety of practical, even commercial, reasons. But whiny and immature reasons like “it’s unfair,” “it makes us look backwards and silly,” or “Mormons can’t tell us what to do” aren’t in the arsenals of truly thinking people. Liquor laws, regulations and proscriptions exist for one very good reason: Liquor hasn’t made one human being a better person. Ever.
As a followup to Thursday's semi-encouraging Weber County Forum writeup, both the Standard and the Tribune report this morning that "the Utah House has advanced" (by a lop-sided 63-11 vote) Ogden Republican Rep. Ryan Wilcox's HB 228, which would "repeal a mandate for restaurants to mix and pour alcoholic drinks behind a barrier," otherwise
The Standard chimes in this morning in with its own strong editorial too:
 |
| Forbidden Zion Curtain Rituals |
That's it for now, folks. So who wants to throw in their own 2¢? Better yet, having digested all the above arguments, pro and con, who wants to go out on a limb a predict the outcome for Rep. Wilcox's HB 228?
Tuesday, March 05, 2013
2013 Utah Legislation Session News Roundup
Wholesome red meat nutrition for our ever-politically ravenous Weber County Forum readers
Over the course of the current 45-day 2013 Utah legislative session, our State legislature's apparently been on its best behavior, possibly because it's occupied by fewer political "kooks" than in years past. Nevertheless, there's still evidence of certain legislative quirks and mis-steps, some of which we've gleaned this morning straight from this morning's Salt Lake Tribune . Here goes, folks: the latest in our never-ending effort to provide wholesome red meat nutrition for our ever-politically ravenous Weber County Forum readers, as our 2013 Utah legislature begins to wrap things up:
Surprise of surprises, the oft-neglected process of upgrading legislative ethics rules has been the subject of at least some proposed legislation during this 2013 Utah legislative session, as the Trib reports this morning on the fates of two 2013 bills addressing that general topic. In that connection "Utah legislators may soon bar themselves from accepting donations while on Capitol Hill — but have decided to continue voting on bills even if they have conflicts of interest," the Trib's Lee Davidson reports:
Specifically, GOP House Rep Greg Hughes's HJR16, "which would prohibit accepting [campaign] donations on Capitol Hill,"easily sailed through the House Rules Committee and has been thus sent on to the full House for a vote. Happily, Hughes recognises that it's exceedingly bad form for lobbyist bag-men to deliver wads of cash to their favorite Utah legislators on the same sacred site where legislators consider the very same bills that they're being paid to promote. As to the other referenced legislation, GOP House Rep. Jim Nelson's HR1, "which would allow members to abstain on votes when they may have a conflict of interest," that piece of much-needed legislation has been summarily nixed in committee and sent on for "further study," — "during interim meetings later this year." We've discussed this issue before on Weber County Forum, of course; and frankly we're perplexed that Utah legislators won't just pass a bill (without all the rigmarole) allowing for legislators to conform to the highest ethical standards and to simply "declare and abstain from voting on any bill or appropriation in which lawmakers believe they have a conflict of interest." Seems like a "no-brainer" to us.
During past years we've devoted considerable WCF electronic ink to stories involving Utah's Government Records and Management Act, and the substantial effort and expense to which which Utah Citizens are often subjected, even when their public document discovery efforts are clearly expended mainly in the public interest. In that connection we'll refer to this morning's Salt Lake Tribune story, which reports that "Democratic"Rep. Brian King’s efforts (HB122) to require agenc[ies] to provide public documents at no cost is going on the back burner":
This is bad news for Utah political activists, folks. So long as Utah's public agencies retain discretion in the waiver of GRAMA request "costs," the same public agencies will continue to thwart the process through trumped up and exorbitant document production fees.
And as an added bonus, here's a real doozy of a story involving Weber County's own State Senator Allen Christensen (you know, that odd-ball legislator from North Ogden who's afraid of the Big Bad Wolf). Seems "[a] bill seeking to turn cock fighting into a felony took a detour during floor comments in the Utah Senate Monday when a Republican expressed dismay that the Legislature was looking to elevate the penalty (SB52) for rooster fighting while abortion remained legal":
"Do we really want to make it a felony and go to prison [because] two chickens were bred — which naturally want to do this thing in their lives — and we’re going to send their owners to prison for this? Yet we allow people to go ahead and murder their unborn babies? I vote no." Yep. That's what Senator Christensen reportedly said.
Senator Allen Christensen, anti-abortion constituent panderer, and champion of "cock fighting sports enthusiasts and industry lobbyists everywhere," yes?
Over the course of the current 45-day 2013 Utah legislative session, our State legislature's apparently been on its best behavior, possibly because it's occupied by fewer political "kooks" than in years past. Nevertheless, there's still evidence of certain legislative quirks and mis-steps, some of which we've gleaned this morning straight from this morning's Salt Lake Tribune . Here goes, folks: the latest in our never-ending effort to provide wholesome red meat nutrition for our ever-politically ravenous Weber County Forum readers, as our 2013 Utah legislature begins to wrap things up:
Surprise of surprises, the oft-neglected process of upgrading legislative ethics rules has been the subject of at least some proposed legislation during this 2013 Utah legislative session, as the Trib reports this morning on the fates of two 2013 bills addressing that general topic. In that connection "Utah legislators may soon bar themselves from accepting donations while on Capitol Hill — but have decided to continue voting on bills even if they have conflicts of interest," the Trib's Lee Davidson reports:
Specifically, GOP House Rep Greg Hughes's HJR16, "which would prohibit accepting [campaign] donations on Capitol Hill,"easily sailed through the House Rules Committee and has been thus sent on to the full House for a vote. Happily, Hughes recognises that it's exceedingly bad form for lobbyist bag-men to deliver wads of cash to their favorite Utah legislators on the same sacred site where legislators consider the very same bills that they're being paid to promote. As to the other referenced legislation, GOP House Rep. Jim Nelson's HR1, "which would allow members to abstain on votes when they may have a conflict of interest," that piece of much-needed legislation has been summarily nixed in committee and sent on for "further study," — "during interim meetings later this year." We've discussed this issue before on Weber County Forum, of course; and frankly we're perplexed that Utah legislators won't just pass a bill (without all the rigmarole) allowing for legislators to conform to the highest ethical standards and to simply "declare and abstain from voting on any bill or appropriation in which lawmakers believe they have a conflict of interest." Seems like a "no-brainer" to us.
During past years we've devoted considerable WCF electronic ink to stories involving Utah's Government Records and Management Act, and the substantial effort and expense to which which Utah Citizens are often subjected, even when their public document discovery efforts are clearly expended mainly in the public interest. In that connection we'll refer to this morning's Salt Lake Tribune story, which reports that "Democratic"Rep. Brian King’s efforts (HB122) to require agenc[ies] to provide public documents at no cost is going on the back burner":
This is bad news for Utah political activists, folks. So long as Utah's public agencies retain discretion in the waiver of GRAMA request "costs," the same public agencies will continue to thwart the process through trumped up and exorbitant document production fees.
And as an added bonus, here's a real doozy of a story involving Weber County's own State Senator Allen Christensen (you know, that odd-ball legislator from North Ogden who's afraid of the Big Bad Wolf). Seems "[a] bill seeking to turn cock fighting into a felony took a detour during floor comments in the Utah Senate Monday when a Republican expressed dismay that the Legislature was looking to elevate the penalty (SB52) for rooster fighting while abortion remained legal":
"Do we really want to make it a felony and go to prison [because] two chickens were bred — which naturally want to do this thing in their lives — and we’re going to send their owners to prison for this? Yet we allow people to go ahead and murder their unborn babies? I vote no." Yep. That's what Senator Christensen reportedly said.
Senator Allen Christensen, anti-abortion constituent panderer, and champion of "cock fighting sports enthusiasts and industry lobbyists everywhere," yes?
Saturday, March 02, 2013
Standard-Examiner Guest Commentary: Utah’s Leaders Need to Tone Down Rhetoric Against President
Hopefully Utah's wing-nut federal legislative delegation write it down so they don't forget it and accordingly tone it down
The Standard-Examiner provides a tip-top guest commentary in this morning's online edition, with the below-linked Steve Olson editorial, containing an earnest admonition, among other things, against what Mr. Olson characterizes the "never-ending negative political grandstanding of Hatch, Lee and Bishop against President Obama and the Democrats, including pot shots at Hatch’s old Republican Senate colleague, new Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel."
Mr. Olson frames his editorial rgument in an entirely plausible scenario in the near future when Obama's Democratic Party administration, in an effort to wind down post-war military spending, will in all likelihood, consider closing down at least one Air Force base base in the western United States, in which connection he asks this probing question, which clearly lays out the dilemma which Hill Air Force supporters face:
You can check out Mr. Olson's full guest editorial here, which is chock-full of practical political wisdom, wethinks:
We issued a similar warning here on Weber County Forum back in January of 2012, by the way, wherein we posed the question: "Would it be a good idea for our sole Utah Democratic Party House Representative Jim Matheson to waltz over to the Senate Office Building, slap Mike Lee upside the head, and then politely ask him to "cool his jets?":
Within that same article we also provided a link to Utah's own legislatively-funded 2004 Utah Defense Alliance study, which provides, in gripping detail, the potentially devastating consequences of a Hill Air Force Base closure:
The prospect of further U.S. military base closures isn't hypothetical, by the way, inasmuch as the Obama administration is still keeping "inevitable" base closures right there "on the front burner":
So in closing we'll just remark that it's one thing for Utah politicians to publicly pander to their right-wing Utah base; and quite another to recklessly place our heavily military-dependent Northern Utah economy at risk of political payback with overly inflammatory political rhetoric.
A Weber County Forum Tip O' the Hat to LDS Democratic Caucus vice-chair Steve Olson for contributing this morning's eye-opening S-E guest editorial.
Hopefully Utah's wing-nut federal legislative delegation write it down so they don't forget it, and accordingly tone down the silly and self-defeating political rhetoric.
The Standard-Examiner provides a tip-top guest commentary in this morning's online edition, with the below-linked Steve Olson editorial, containing an earnest admonition, among other things, against what Mr. Olson characterizes the "never-ending negative political grandstanding of Hatch, Lee and Bishop against President Obama and the Democrats, including pot shots at Hatch’s old Republican Senate colleague, new Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel."
Mr. Olson frames his editorial rgument in an entirely plausible scenario in the near future when Obama's Democratic Party administration, in an effort to wind down post-war military spending, will in all likelihood, consider closing down at least one Air Force base base in the western United States, in which connection he asks this probing question, which clearly lays out the dilemma which Hill Air Force supporters face:
Should we [Democrats] close Nellis, north of Las Vegas, just up the road from Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s home in what will be a solidly Democratic state by [the time of the next base closure]? Or do we close Hill? It’s hard to see how we win that argument, despite the obvious merits in favor of Hill. Anyone who thinks these decisions are made in the absence of politics is loony."Politics ain't beanbag," as the old saying goes; and if future U.S. base closure decisions come down to politics, as Mr. Olson aptly points out, under an Obama administration, Utah - realistically speaking - is quite likely to be left holding the "short" end of the stick.
You can check out Mr. Olson's full guest editorial here, which is chock-full of practical political wisdom, wethinks:
We issued a similar warning here on Weber County Forum back in January of 2012, by the way, wherein we posed the question: "Would it be a good idea for our sole Utah Democratic Party House Representative Jim Matheson to waltz over to the Senate Office Building, slap Mike Lee upside the head, and then politely ask him to "cool his jets?":
Within that same article we also provided a link to Utah's own legislatively-funded 2004 Utah Defense Alliance study, which provides, in gripping detail, the potentially devastating consequences of a Hill Air Force Base closure:
The prospect of further U.S. military base closures isn't hypothetical, by the way, inasmuch as the Obama administration is still keeping "inevitable" base closures right there "on the front burner":
So in closing we'll just remark that it's one thing for Utah politicians to publicly pander to their right-wing Utah base; and quite another to recklessly place our heavily military-dependent Northern Utah economy at risk of political payback with overly inflammatory political rhetoric.
A Weber County Forum Tip O' the Hat to LDS Democratic Caucus vice-chair Steve Olson for contributing this morning's eye-opening S-E guest editorial.
Hopefully Utah's wing-nut federal legislative delegation write it down so they don't forget it, and accordingly tone down the silly and self-defeating political rhetoric.
Friday, March 01, 2013
Salt Lake City Weekly: Senate Pres Could Profit From Prison Relocation
Sodden Question: "Is there anyone out there in WCF Readerland who's the least bit surprised about this suspiciously odoriferous political scenario?"
We'll dirct our readers' attention to potential blockbuster Utah legislative conflict of interest story simmering on the Utah news front-burner this morning, as City Weekly carries a 2/28/13 story reporting that Utah State Senate President Wayne Niederhauser (R-Sandy) possibly stands to reap a substantial financial windfall if the state legislature ultimately decides to move the Utah State Prison, a prospect that's been floating around in the public forefront for the entirety of the 2013 legislative session. CW Reporter Eric Peterson's lead paragraphs provide the gist:
"Under Senator Scott Jenkins’ SB72, Niederhauser won’t be able to stay away from his duty in appointing senators to the Prison Land Management Authority. Niederhauser says that, unfortunately, he can’t get around his own conflict of interest but says such things are unavoidable in a citizen-run Legislature," yesterday's SL Weekly story further reports.
Astonishingly, faced with an arguably blatant conflict of interest in this matter, Niederhauser nevertheless seems entirely unwilling to recuse himself from his prospective Prison Land Management Authority board member appointment role; and here's another eye-popping Niederhauser quote:
“I don’t make a living being a legislator, and I don’t think the people want me to make a living being a legislator and, consequently, all of us have conflicts of interest and we try to deal with them the best way possible, by [merely] declaring all of our conflicts,” Niederhauser says.
Niederhauser evidently thinks it his overriding, unavoidable duty to act, you see, O Gentle Readers, despite his admittedly conflicted position. Thus, in our "blessed" Utah legislature, "duty to stack an legislative expolaratory committee" apparently trumps "scrupulous avoidance of the appearance of impropriety."
Complicating the narrative, City Weekly further reveals that Niederhouser's own "business partner lobbied" SB72's Senator Jenkins "for the relocation," even though Niederhauser claims, with a completely straight face, that he hadn't "even thought about how the prison might affect [he and his real estate development partner]." Jenkins, of course just goes right along with the Senate President (with an equally straight face, we guess) and says that he didn't know "nuttin' from nuttin'" about Niederhuser's property interest prior to drafting his pending bill.
Adding further grist to the discussion mill, at least one other Utah blogger has also latched onto this story, and suggests that it's not just Niederhauser, but also Jenkins himself, who may sit in the conflict of interest hot-seat with respect to this convoluted legislative transaction:
We'll be keeping a close on this story as developments continue to play out; but in the meantime we'll ask the sodden question:
"Is there anyone out there in WCF Readerland who's the least bit surprised about this suspiciously odoriferous political scenario?"
Whatever you do, don't let the cat get your tongues.
Property even four miles away from the prison will see a huge upswing in value if the prison is relocated and replaced with a major commercial development. That does raise concerns that Niederhauser would be too closely tied to the prison relocation plan.
Buzz Welch, Director, U. of U. Ivory Boyer Real Estate Center
Senate Pres Could Profit From Prison Relocation
February 28, 2013
Senate Pres Could Profit From Prison Relocation
February 28, 2013
I haven’t even thought about how the prison might affect us, because prison relocation is so far down the road. We’ll be done and won’t own any property in that area by the time that happens
Wayne Niederhauser, Utah Senate President
Senate Pres Could Profit From Prison Relocation
February 28, 2013
Senate Pres Could Profit From Prison Relocation
February 28, 2013
We'll dirct our readers' attention to potential blockbuster Utah legislative conflict of interest story simmering on the Utah news front-burner this morning, as City Weekly carries a 2/28/13 story reporting that Utah State Senate President Wayne Niederhauser (R-Sandy) possibly stands to reap a substantial financial windfall if the state legislature ultimately decides to move the Utah State Prison, a prospect that's been floating around in the public forefront for the entirety of the 2013 legislative session. CW Reporter Eric Peterson's lead paragraphs provide the gist:
A bill passed favorably out of committee Wednesday to create a special board to consider the economic worth of relocating the Utah State Prison in Draper and developing the land underneath it. The bill would allow Senate President Wayne Niederhauser, R-Sandy, to assign three senate members to that group, which raises ethical concerns, considering that Niederhauser operates a holding company that owns more than 30 acres of undeveloped property near the prison that could increase considerably in value if the board decides to move the prison. [Emphasis added.]Get the full lowdown here, O Weber County Forum Legislative wonks:
"Under Senator Scott Jenkins’ SB72, Niederhauser won’t be able to stay away from his duty in appointing senators to the Prison Land Management Authority. Niederhauser says that, unfortunately, he can’t get around his own conflict of interest but says such things are unavoidable in a citizen-run Legislature," yesterday's SL Weekly story further reports.
Astonishingly, faced with an arguably blatant conflict of interest in this matter, Niederhauser nevertheless seems entirely unwilling to recuse himself from his prospective Prison Land Management Authority board member appointment role; and here's another eye-popping Niederhauser quote:
“I don’t make a living being a legislator, and I don’t think the people want me to make a living being a legislator and, consequently, all of us have conflicts of interest and we try to deal with them the best way possible, by [merely] declaring all of our conflicts,” Niederhauser says.
Niederhauser evidently thinks it his overriding, unavoidable duty to act, you see, O Gentle Readers, despite his admittedly conflicted position. Thus, in our "blessed" Utah legislature, "duty to stack an legislative expolaratory committee" apparently trumps "scrupulous avoidance of the appearance of impropriety."
Complicating the narrative, City Weekly further reveals that Niederhouser's own "business partner lobbied" SB72's Senator Jenkins "for the relocation," even though Niederhauser claims, with a completely straight face, that he hadn't "even thought about how the prison might affect [he and his real estate development partner]." Jenkins, of course just goes right along with the Senate President (with an equally straight face, we guess) and says that he didn't know "nuttin' from nuttin'" about Niederhuser's property interest prior to drafting his pending bill.
Adding further grist to the discussion mill, at least one other Utah blogger has also latched onto this story, and suggests that it's not just Niederhauser, but also Jenkins himself, who may sit in the conflict of interest hot-seat with respect to this convoluted legislative transaction:
We'll be keeping a close on this story as developments continue to play out; but in the meantime we'll ask the sodden question:
"Is there anyone out there in WCF Readerland who's the least bit surprised about this suspiciously odoriferous political scenario?"
Whatever you do, don't let the cat get your tongues.
Thursday, February 28, 2013
Common Sense State House "Zion Curtain" Liquor Law Fix Poised to Suffer "Senate Leadership" Fatal Blow
“We don’t want restaurants looking like bars,” says Utah Senate Leadership (so-called)
In encouraging stories breaking yesterday, Salt Lake City Weekly, The Tribune and Standard-Examiner all gleefully reported on a pending Utah House of Representatives bill, HB 228, aimed in pertinent part (see lines 764-791) to eliminate Utah's quirky "Zion Curtain" statutory provision, which refers to "the permanent structural barriers" required of restaurants to shield underage patrons from the morals-corrupting sight of wine being poured and cocktails being mixed.
The bill's sponsor, Rep. Ryan Wilcox R-Ogden, said during testimony yesterday before the House Revenue and Taxation Committee "that after significant study, there was no evidence of any kind to be found showing the walls were helping to prevent underage drinking."
“An uneven playing field that’s the first strike, we haven’t been able to show it encourages underage drinking and the third one is that we get fun headlines [about the Zion wall] in The New York Times, USA Today and even The Economist,” Wilcox also told committee members.
For our readers' convenience we'll helpfully provide the above-mentioned northern Utah print media stories via the links below:
While it's obvious that Ogden's own House Rep Wilcox has done his homework and that this fact-based proposed legislation would succeed in a more rational state legislature, it's time for Wilcox to adopt a more forceful and precise lobbying approach, wethinks. Perhaps in fact it's time for Wilcox to a appeal to a higher Utah legislative authority with something appealingly Reaganesque, maybe a Gipper-like message like this, que no?
Don't let the cat get your tongues.
In encouraging stories breaking yesterday, Salt Lake City Weekly, The Tribune and Standard-Examiner all gleefully reported on a pending Utah House of Representatives bill, HB 228, aimed in pertinent part (see lines 764-791) to eliminate Utah's quirky "Zion Curtain" statutory provision, which refers to "the permanent structural barriers" required of restaurants to shield underage patrons from the morals-corrupting sight of wine being poured and cocktails being mixed.
The bill's sponsor, Rep. Ryan Wilcox R-Ogden, said during testimony yesterday before the House Revenue and Taxation Committee "that after significant study, there was no evidence of any kind to be found showing the walls were helping to prevent underage drinking."
“An uneven playing field that’s the first strike, we haven’t been able to show it encourages underage drinking and the third one is that we get fun headlines [about the Zion wall] in The New York Times, USA Today and even The Economist,” Wilcox also told committee members.
For our readers' convenience we'll helpfully provide the above-mentioned northern Utah print media stories via the links below:
- Bill to Tear Down "Zion Walls" from Restaurants Clears Panel
- Bill aims to help businesses take down ‘Zion Curtain’
- Bill could tear down Zion curtains at restaurants
In a news briefing, Sen. John Valentine, R-Orem, said the bill has little chance to pass the Senate in its current format. He said he will work with Wilcox and other House leaders to find a potential compromise. He suggested any offset would have to address public safety concerns.Check out this morning's discouraging S-E story for the full lowdown:
“We don’t want restaurants looking like bars,” Senate President Wayne Niederhauser, R-Sandy, said of the bill.
While it's obvious that Ogden's own House Rep Wilcox has done his homework and that this fact-based proposed legislation would succeed in a more rational state legislature, it's time for Wilcox to adopt a more forceful and precise lobbying approach, wethinks. Perhaps in fact it's time for Wilcox to a appeal to a higher Utah legislative authority with something appealingly Reaganesque, maybe a Gipper-like message like this, que no?
President Monson, tear down those walls!The floor's open for your ever-savvy comments, O Gentle Ones.
Don't let the cat get your tongues.
Wednesday, February 27, 2013
Standard-Examiner: Ogden Council Resolves to Give $100,000 to Mobile App Lab
Money falling from helicopters in the sky?
By Smaatguy
According to this morning's Standard-Examiner, it looks like the Ogden App Lab is getting another $100k, from Busness Depot Ogden (BDO) retained earnings:
What started out as an $800k project is now $2 mil. Interesting... money falling from helicopters in the sky... Makes ya think Ben Bernankster was in town.
By Smaatguy
What started out as an $800k project is now $2 mil. Interesting... money falling from helicopters in the sky... Makes ya think Ben Bernankster was in town.
Tuesday, February 26, 2013
Dan Schroeder Responds to Sunday's Charlie Trentelman Column
Hopefully with the publication of this letter, the Standard will at long last "remove its blinders" and assign one of its own reporters to cover this important story in depth
In response to Sunday's Charlie Trentelman "Wasatch Rambler" column, wherein the Standard's venerable and intrepid "shorttimer columnist" calculates that his own "bargain" share of the cost of Ogden "police protection" amounts merely to the cost of a measly "two family pizza dinners," Ogden City political activist Dan Schroeder contributes the below-linked Standard-Examiner letter to the editor, publicly exposing, for the first time in the Standard-Examiner, the "hidden tax" which Ogden City secretly "rakes off" Ogden City utility fee revenue:
So far the Standard has been "sitting on its thumbs," and has remained completely oblivious to Dan's prodigious ongoing efforts to expose Ogden City's mendacious utility rates boondoggle. Hopefully with the publication of this letter, the Standard will at long last "remove its blinders" and assign one of its own reporters to cover this important story in depth. These are YOUR hard earned utility dollars, folks; and it's the Standard's journalistic duty, we believe, in the continuing and troubling absence of open Ogden City public disclosure, to dig in and report exactly how city bureaucrats and elected officials ever-so-quietly misappropriate or otherwise mis-shuffle these funds.
So who'll be the first to throw in their own 2¢?
But what the Ogden Police Department gets from each of us isn’t very much: $73 a year from me works out to 23 cents a day. Would you protect me for 23 cents a day? I’m not even sure I would.
Charles Trentelman - Standard-Examiner
Pondering pepperoni pizza and the price of providing police protection
February 23, 2013
Pondering pepperoni pizza and the price of providing police protection
February 23, 2013
Mr. Trentelman, in any case, is paying considerably more for police protection than he thinks. Besides the $73 share of his property tax, he’s paying roughly another $45 out of his utility bills for police service. The police also get a share of the franchise tax he pays on his other utilities, and of the sales tax he pays on his purchases.
Dan Schroeder - Standard-Examiner Letter to the Editor
Money from Ogden utility bills also helps fund police
February 25, 2013
Money from Ogden utility bills also helps fund police
February 25, 2013
In response to Sunday's Charlie Trentelman "Wasatch Rambler" column, wherein the Standard's venerable and intrepid "shorttimer columnist" calculates that his own "bargain" share of the cost of Ogden "police protection" amounts merely to the cost of a measly "two family pizza dinners," Ogden City political activist Dan Schroeder contributes the below-linked Standard-Examiner letter to the editor, publicly exposing, for the first time in the Standard-Examiner, the "hidden tax" which Ogden City secretly "rakes off" Ogden City utility fee revenue:
So far the Standard has been "sitting on its thumbs," and has remained completely oblivious to Dan's prodigious ongoing efforts to expose Ogden City's mendacious utility rates boondoggle. Hopefully with the publication of this letter, the Standard will at long last "remove its blinders" and assign one of its own reporters to cover this important story in depth. These are YOUR hard earned utility dollars, folks; and it's the Standard's journalistic duty, we believe, in the continuing and troubling absence of open Ogden City public disclosure, to dig in and report exactly how city bureaucrats and elected officials ever-so-quietly misappropriate or otherwise mis-shuffle these funds.
So who'll be the first to throw in their own 2¢?
Monday, February 25, 2013
Ogden City Business Development Division Video: Welcome to Ogden, Utah
Video-wise, the situation's definitely looking up
In the midst of another Sl-o-o-o-w Ogden City news day, we'll direct our readers' attention to a notable Ogden City video tout piece which just caught our attention on the Ogden City Business Development Division website:
Things are definitely looking up, video-wise, since the last time we provided an Ogden City development-topical video on our home town Weber County Forum blogsite, don'tcha thimk?
So who'll be the first to chime in with their very own savvy film critique?
In the midst of another Sl-o-o-o-w Ogden City news day, we'll direct our readers' attention to a notable Ogden City video tout piece which just caught our attention on the Ogden City Business Development Division website:
Things are definitely looking up, video-wise, since the last time we provided an Ogden City development-topical video on our home town Weber County Forum blogsite, don'tcha thimk?
So who'll be the first to chime in with their very own savvy film critique?
Saturday, February 23, 2013
Standard-Examiner: Two ‘Institutions’ Soon to Bid Farewell to Journalism Careers
An unfortunate and disconcerting "double whammy," as far as your blogmeister is concerned.
Bad news for Standard-Examiner readers this morning, as managing editor Andy Howell announces the imminent retirement of two of the Standard's most accomplished staff journalists, Charlie Trentelman and Dave Greiling.
"Kind of an out with the old, in with the new passing of the baton," says Editor Andy, with carefully chosen words of consolation.
Actually an unfortunate and disconcerting "double whammy," as far as your blogmeister is concerned.
For die-hard Standard readers, these two fellas will be impossible to replace, of course.
Happy trails, Charlie and Dave. Thanks for your multitude of important contributions to the local lumpencitizen discussion, in which regard you'll both be sorely missed.
Bad news for Standard-Examiner readers this morning, as managing editor Andy Howell announces the imminent retirement of two of the Standard's most accomplished staff journalists, Charlie Trentelman and Dave Greiling.
"Kind of an out with the old, in with the new passing of the baton," says Editor Andy, with carefully chosen words of consolation.
Actually an unfortunate and disconcerting "double whammy," as far as your blogmeister is concerned.
For die-hard Standard readers, these two fellas will be impossible to replace, of course.
Happy trails, Charlie and Dave. Thanks for your multitude of important contributions to the local lumpencitizen discussion, in which regard you'll both be sorely missed.
Greg Bell Local/Federal Investigations: Here Comes the Damage Control - Updated
Sadly for poor old John Swallow however, he's not "feeling any GOP love" at all
In the wake of yesterday's disturbing Standard-Examiner story, revealing that Lieutenant Governor Greg Bell is under investigation by local and federal prosecutors for abusing his executive power concerning a Division of Child and Family Services (DCFS) child-welfare investigation, here comes the predictable damage control, via the Salt Lake Tribune (of all places):
And there's more. Lt. Gov. Greg Bell said Friday that he was "merely trying to get to the bottom of "conflicting claims" in a child-abuse case with a performance audit he ordered in 2011," (when he unleashed the intimidatory power of the State Auditor's office in an alleged attempt to derail the subject DCFS investigation):
And why was the Utah Lieutenant Governor meddling in this single DCFS investigation?
And the beat goes on...
Update 2/23/13 12:00 p.m: There's more on this story from the Standard-Examiner.
For the first time, Bell's purported "retaliation" against DCFS is explicitly mentioned:
And the Standard provides more on the above-mentioned GOP legislative faction's "Greg Bell Love-fest":
Something's definitely rotten in the State of Denmark, wethinks.
In the wake of yesterday's disturbing Standard-Examiner story, revealing that Lieutenant Governor Greg Bell is under investigation by local and federal prosecutors for abusing his executive power concerning a Division of Child and Family Services (DCFS) child-welfare investigation, here comes the predictable damage control, via the Salt Lake Tribune (of all places):
State senators on Friday were vouching for the honesty and character of Lt. Gov. Greg Bell, a former Senate colleague who now finds himself ensnared in a federal probe after intervening in a child-abuse investigation and pushing for an audit of the case.
"If I were to put it in transportation terms, I believe that Greg Bell is so straight, you could use him as a template to stripe the freeways with," said Sen. Stuart Adams, R-Layton, who succeeded Bell. "I hope there’s no foundation to these allegations."
Senate President Wayne Niederhauser, R-Sandy, said Bell was an "outstanding" senator and "was one of the top people as far as doing the right thing."
The senators’ vocal backing of Bell echoes supportive comments Thursday from Gov. Gary Herbert, who called Bell "as honest as the day is long."
Read up, folks:
Sadly for poor old John Swallow however, he's not "feeling any GOP love" at all:
A cynic (like us) would suggest that Utah GOP insiders are circling the wagons around Lt. Governor Bell, and getting ready to throw Attorney General Swallow under the bus, que no?Sadly for poor old John Swallow however, he's not "feeling any GOP love" at all:
It also presents a stark contrast to the lack of support received by new Attorney General John Swallow, who is also the target of a federal investigation for his involvement with a Utah businessman, who was under investigation by the Federal Trade Commission, and for other campaign fundraising issues.
"We’ve stood shoulder to shoulder with Greg Bell," said Sen. Lyle Hillyard, R-Logan. "We don’t have that same relationship with John Swallow."
And there's more. Lt. Gov. Greg Bell said Friday that he was "merely trying to get to the bottom of "conflicting claims" in a child-abuse case with a performance audit he ordered in 2011," (when he unleashed the intimidatory power of the State Auditor's office in an alleged attempt to derail the subject DCFS investigation):
And why was the Utah Lieutenant Governor meddling in this single DCFS investigation?
Friday evening, state Sen. Todd Weiler, R-Woods Cross, criticized any comparison of Bell to Attorney General John Swallow — who also is under investigation by the FBI — because "what Greg is accused of doing is trying to help a friend and neighbor."Suggested new theme song for "friends and neighbors" of Utah GOP elected officials:
And the beat goes on...
Update 2/23/13 12:00 p.m: There's more on this story from the Standard-Examiner.
For the first time, Bell's purported "retaliation" against DCFS is explicitly mentioned:
And the Standard provides more on the above-mentioned GOP legislative faction's "Greg Bell Love-fest":
Something's definitely rotten in the State of Denmark, wethinks.
Friday, February 22, 2013
Standard-Examiner: Greg Bell Audit Under Investigation
On a brighter note, 3 out of 5 Utah Constitutional Officers are NOT known to be currently under investigation by the FBI
At risk of coming off as arriving late to the party, we'll note that the Standard-Examiner reported this morning that yet another Utah GOP elected official has landed in the legal hotseat, as the Davis County Attorney and the FBI look into allegations that Lieutenant Governor Bell had a "personal interest" in a Division of Child and Family Services (DCFS) child-welfare investigation and improperly "tried to derail it with an audit of the way the case was handled":
And now there's more breaking news from the Standard, datelined Friday, 02/22/2013 - 4:02 p.m., reporting that it was one of the Governor Herbert's own cabinet members who ratted out Bell:
Oh my. Taking Utah Attorney General John Swallow's legal troubles into account, all signs point to a banner year and a full employment economy for Utah defense counsel (and government prosecutors) this year, no doubt.
On a brighter note, 3 out of 5 Utah Constitutional Officers are NOT known to be currently under investigation by the FBI.
Don't let the cat get your tongues, O Gentle WCF Readers.
At risk of coming off as arriving late to the party, we'll note that the Standard-Examiner reported this morning that yet another Utah GOP elected official has landed in the legal hotseat, as the Davis County Attorney and the FBI look into allegations that Lieutenant Governor Bell had a "personal interest" in a Division of Child and Family Services (DCFS) child-welfare investigation and improperly "tried to derail it with an audit of the way the case was handled":
And now there's more breaking news from the Standard, datelined Friday, 02/22/2013 - 4:02 p.m., reporting that it was one of the Governor Herbert's own cabinet members who ratted out Bell:
Oh my. Taking Utah Attorney General John Swallow's legal troubles into account, all signs point to a banner year and a full employment economy for Utah defense counsel (and government prosecutors) this year, no doubt.
On a brighter note, 3 out of 5 Utah Constitutional Officers are NOT known to be currently under investigation by the FBI.
Don't let the cat get your tongues, O Gentle WCF Readers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
© 2005 - 2014 Weber County Forum™ -- All Rights Reserved