However, Ken Burton, also of Ogden, said he supports the Peterson proposal and would like to see supporters and opponents of the plan reach a compromise. "Let's work the plan out (to benefit everyone)," he said.Although we've already benefitted from considerable early meeting feedback in last night's reader comments, we'd welcome further discussion here, comparing the facts reported in this morning's Scott Schwebke's story, with the impressions of Weber County Forum readers who themselves attended last night's event. In this connection we are particularly fascinated by Ace Reporter Schwebke's novel word selection in describing the citizen turnout for a community meeting on yesterday's dark and wintry night. Whereas Dian's earlier comments speak of an actual head-count of 133, reporter Schwebke chooses to describe the attendance as "dozens of residents." That's eleven dozen in attendance, gentle readers, by the way, according to our careful calculations -- and we wonder why reporter Schwebke saw fit to seemingly downplay the numbers. Perhaps our gentle readers have their own theories about this.
And on another note, we're linking two stories that appeared in yesterday's Standard Examiner and Salt Lake Tribune, concerning the ambiguous situation created by Boss Godfrey, when he recently scratched out the Weber State/Intermodal Hub corridor on a Wasatch Regional Council public transit proposal map. This incautious act on the part of Boss Godfrey caused enough confusion, it is reported, to have required Emerald City Council Chairman Garcia to intervene, and to issue his own remedial letter.
And we really loved this typically snarky remark from Boss Godfrey, who says it wasn't HIS mistake at all: "This just underscores they [council members] don't know how the process works," Godfrey said Tuesday. "It isn't a matter of wishing for a project to be on or off."
We thank gentle reader Curmudgeon for bringing this matter to our attention last week. And we'd also like to thank Chairman Garcia for his proactive response to what could have been a terribly painful economic outcome, resulting from yet another sloppy Boss Godfrey blunder. It's certainly nice to know that somebody in local government is paying attention, and looking after our citizen interests.
And we couldn't fail to note that Boss Godfrey still seems to cling to the notion that his ever-persistent gondola fantasy represents a legitimate public transportation alternative. Although we'd assumed that he'd backed off on this ludicrous argument recently, it seems he's now let the cat out of the bag about his secret intentions once again.
Reader comments are invited on either of these topics.
And Don't let Boss Godfrey's cat get your tongues.
15 comments:
In defence of Mr. Schwebke on this Morning's story:
OK, granted, he should have gotten the attendence count from the Planning Staff. And I wish he'd asked the guy who favored the Peterson plan but wanted "compromise" just what compromise he thought might work. [I wonder if Schwebke did ask that?]
Now, that said: Mr. Schwebke did convey the general sense of the meeting that no development should occur on the public open lands [aka Mt. Ogden Park lands] in the neighborhood. And he did relate what went on last night to the elephant in the room that no one mentioned: the Peterson proposal. That was good reporting. And that connection [Perterson plan/ Mt. Ogden community plan] is what gave the story broader interest to Ogden readers outside of the neighborhood. So I can't fault him for that.
And he is working under space limits. Given that, I think he focused his attention pretty well on the big issue. Still, what got buried were the other elements of the Mt. Ogden Community plan proposal, and as a resident, had I not been there, I would have wanted to know about them too. Which [once again] is how blogsitss like WCF provide a real service. WCF reporters, like Dian, not limited by the space contraints of the SE, can cover meetings much more fully and provide information for those who want it that the SE cannot provide [or chooses not to provide --- either way, the effect is the same].
Rudi,
Concerning Schwebke's account of Godfrey's 'scratching out the streetcar corridor on the map', he did an okay job of reporting until he quoted Godfrey once AGAIN as touting the streetcar AND gondola as transit modes for the city.....he should have told that UTA will not fund
both! And, aren't we sick of Schwebke filling space with the same old story of "Peterson's propsal"...down to the luxury homes, sale of the golf course to build that damnable gondola from 'the intermodal hub'??? ( and who thot up that yucky name??)
Egads, even a second grade reader has that propaganda memorized by now!
Yeah, I caught Scott's deficiency in math also. I thot it was a good turnout last nite and as I said earlier, it was good to see the PC members and all the City Council there, with the exception of Brandon Stephenson. I thot that maybe he and Matt were having a lemonade close by?
Kudos and huzzah's to all involved in last nite's exceptional work!!
Sharon:
You wrote: Egads, even a second grade reader has that propaganda memorized by now!
I think you're wrong about that, Sharon. You [and I] and most readers of WCForum, I expect, are engaged on this matter on one side or the other. We follow it closely and are up on the Peterson non-proposal and what it involves, and on the Mayor's latest slight-of-hand involving transit corridors. But I suspect many people who might read the SE story are not. For example, I keep running into people --- students at WSU, people around town, etc. --- who think there is only one gondola being proposed, not two, and who think "the gondola" will take them from downtown straight to Snow Basin via a stop at WSU.
It would be unwise, I think, to assume that because we are up on these issues and thoroughly familiar with where things stand on them at any given moment, that most people are. From what I see [and hear] around town, that just is not so.
I had to work late last night, so I didn't get to Mt. Ogden Middle School until 9:45. The lady at the door said total attendance was 140, and there were still a handful of people checking out the community plan proposals posted on the walls, plastered with yellow, pink, and green sticky-notes.
Even though they were starting to take down the displays, Rick Grover of the Planning Dept. handed me some stickes, explained the procedure, and gamely said, "Let me know if you have any questions."
"I have plenty of questions," I replied, "but I'll ask them later."
Grover said that printed copies of the Power Point presentation will be available at their office---all you have to do is ask. However, he was unsure whether or not the document will be posted on the Ogden City website.
As I scanned the displays I overheard Ron Atencio say to Grover, "Long night, huh? We were up till midnight, a couple weeks ago."
My question is: What happens next? Is there an interregnum during "the holiday season?" Will there be any other major public events relating to the Godola proposal before the fateful January 23 City Council meeting? Is this the part where, as Councilwoman Jeske pointed out, "We lose momentum?"
Bob:
Since we would have only about 20 minutes per report [five reports on panels] last night to read, think about and make comments, I asked Greg Montgomery if we could submit via email comments/questions/suggestions we might think of over the next few days, and after talking with neighbors, etc. He said yes. If you have any additional comments you can email them to the planning staff, he said, over the next few days, and they'll be included in the review of "post-em" note comments.
I was a committee member and attended last night. People there got to vote on the many findings with green, yellow, and red stickies for yes, maybe, and no respectively, and they got to write comments.
The statements that I happened to agree with most strongly, like that we should maintain and even buy open space to preserve it were covered with green, with one or two red. The ratio was 20:1 or better.
One map showed a possible reconfiguration of the golf course along the lines of the Godfrey delusion. It was rejected by that committee but was shown so the attendees could comment. It was covered with red stickies.
Schwebke's article was dull as it was inaccurate. The community turned out in force and spoke with a virtually unanimous voice to the council members and planning commission members in attendance.
It was a great evening. In a previous meeting some of my fellow committee members had expressed concern that the city staff had watered down recommendations. But last night, the recommendations seemed aligned with what the people were saying.
Now we'll see if Godfrey and his snakes in the grass will be able to adulterate and dilute the clear message as it goes forward from here. He must try to do so, because the Peterson gambit is totally inconsistent with the clearly expressed will of the people.
And for what it's worth, there were many, many other good ideas that came forward that had nothing to do with Godfrey or his cronies.
Bob:
(And let me say how good it is to see you writing on WCF,) ...so the meeting picked up at least seven more people between 8:30 and 9:45. Interesting! I'm sure there were a few more present who didn't sign in.
As I've said before, no one can accuse Ogdenites of apathy.
You mentioned the late nights of the Planning Commission---both the Planning Commission and the Ogden City Council put in a huge amount of hours. If we look at the City Council just this week, they attended the four hour+ marathon meeting Tuesday, attended a Work Session last night, and went to the Neighborhood Meeting directly from that. And there were probably other things of which I am not aware---like telephone time, mail responding, maybe even a Work Session before Tuesday's meeting, etc.
I personally think they are overworked and underpaid, but they have shown themselves to be more than equal to it. Even if one at times differs politically with them, we are very lucky to have them.
We are also very lucky to have those who participated in the meetings and served on the steering committees. This process has turned into a really good example of how American democracy is supposed to work. It looks like we're finally getting it right.
In answer to your question, the steering committee recommendations, which we saw last night, will now be put together into a final form for the Mount Ogden Neighborhood Plan by the Planning Commission. I imagine there will be another public hearing on what they come up with, and then I would also assume that the Council needs to approve it in order that it be made part of the Ogden City Master(General) Plan.
So if a developer submits requests by petition that the General Plan be amended, as the Discovery Ogden process states that Chris Peterson will do, the Mount Ogden portion would have to be amended also.
I'll step up and defend Schwebke for his boilerplate summary of the Peterson proposal. I do think it's important to remind readers of these basic facts. And he has modified it recently: He has finally inserted the acreage of the undeveloped city land that Peterson hopes to acquire, namely, 60 acres. Initially he wasn't mentioning this property at all--just the golf course and the WSU land. Then, after getting complaints from citizens who care about all the trails on that property, he started mentioning it without an acreage figure, and once quoted the mayor saying it amounted to "several" acres. The 60 acre figure comes from Greg Montgomery himself, who included it in his PowerPoint presentation to the Mt. Ogden community at Wasatch School last June.
Add in the 115 city-owned acres in the golf course, and the total acreage that Peterson wants from the city comes to 175.
I don't know where the 150-acre figure for the WSU property comes from. My best estimate, based on a pretty good map, is that WSU's property east of Skyline Drive amounts to only 130 acres.
I thought the process that was used to develop the Mt. Ogden Community Plan was ingenious -- they not only were able to obtain the points of view on the various aspects of the plan of the committee members who live in the area, but with the stickee notes they also received input from all of the Ogden residents, both pro and con. Even Bob Geiger was there!
So now that we know how the majority of Ogden feels about retaining their prize possession, crown jewels or whaterver you want to call them, why doesn't the Council just tell Chris Peterson that the citizens have spoken -- they don't want a high-class gated community -- they want their open spaces and the quality of life that comes with them. Tell Chris Peterson, "No!" and then lets start the healing process of putting Ogden back together after the Mayor conscientiously and deliberately tore it apart.
Anonymous,
I couldn't agree with you more!! The citizens have eloquently and forcefully spoken!
Instead of spending one more hour, or a dozen, just say NO!
Last night's excellent turnout which produced all those comments against selling ANY land, having a 'gated' community, 'recongifuring' a perfectly fine golf course, etc., is proof beyond any doubt that this town is telling Peterson, Godfrey and the rest of the pillagers to 'take a hike'...and we have the trails to accomodate them.
Curm, I almost agree with your response to my earlier post that not everyone ( who reads the SE) really knows what's going on. The point is that they keep reading the same claptrap that Schwebke and the editorial board? keep printing, ad nauseum. I know that if my little g'kids were reading that stuff as often as it's printed, they'd know it by heart.
But, you are right. What the public is fed is toxic waste. This mayor and Ellison have poisoned any fair debate and are attempting to cram down our throats a mess of rotten pottage.
The antidote for this swill is a hearty slug of common sense, and a resolve to always read the 'small print' on any schemes these doctors of scammery 'prescribe' for the fabricated 'ills' of Ogden.
I hope "Committee Member" who posted above really IS on a committee with the authority to stop Dr. Mengele and his mad assistants from dissecting Ogden's heart.
Don't swallow til you read the small print!
I agree that most people in the city have come to view this issue simply as "The Gondola". Godfrey and Peterson and the hired teams of Pinnacle and SE have muddied the issue by also not defining the project by it's various proposed components. So we have most seeing it as "do we want the Gondola or Not?" When faced with such a complex proposal, that statement sounds rudimentary at best.
Of interest, perhaps, from today's SL Trib:
"Ogden booster faces felony charges"
By Kristen Moulton
The Salt Lake Tribune
"Gadi Leshem Pleads not guilty"
A businessman who has been snapping up property in blighted downtown Ogden and helped produce a video touting Mayor Matthew Godfrey's vision of the city as a recreational hub faces felony fraud charges in California.
Gadi Leshem, president and chief executive officer of Cover-All Inc., a flooring-installation company, is accused along with two of his executives of cheating California out of $11 million in workers-compensation insurance premiums since 2001.
Leshem, 59, pleaded not guilty to one felony count of conspiracy and four felony counts of insurance fraud earlier this week in Los Angeles County Superior Court.
His attorney, Mark Werksman, said the case is without merit and that he expects all charges to be dismissed.
Businessmen promoting Ogden have called Leshem a "visionary" who began investing in Ogden because he sees great promise in the northern Utah city's future as an urban center linked by gondola to a mountain resort.
He was the executive producer last year of a video - "Ogden: It's All Within Reach" - that Godfrey used to promote the city as a recreational magnet to prospective businesses.
Rest of the story linked here.
Here's the interesting part:
"According to records at the Weber County Assessor's Office, Leshem has invested in 28 parcels - mostly vacant commercial land downtown - worth nearly $1.5 million.
"Most of the property, including two warehouses and two old homes, sits along Wall Avenue or in the blighted area slated for redevelopment as part of the Ogden River Project.
And here's some further background on this story: News: 2006 California Department of Insurance Press Release
Curm...Thanx for link to Kristins's excellent article! Rudi, the link you provided won't come up for me.
Godfrey is always 'unavailable for comment' when his kingdom is in disarray.
The link works fine for us, Sharon.
Hold your horses though. We've been working on this story since early this morning, and expect to put something up on the front page later.
New comments are not allowed.