vision2020
Re: What future for 2020?
I favor adding members to the committee who have some sense of
the mission statement, history of the group, and knowledge of
the city/county. Meet, generate ideas about directions, ask for
input from the listserv, post the committee's consensus and thoughts
to the listserve and go from there. Maybe a face to face will
be helpful, maybe not. I don't know how the listserv helps us--how
many are participating--by at least "listening"--could we do some
outreach by means other than the listserv to generate participation?
should we wait for specific issues at which to direct our efforts and
then take it to the streets--I sort of favor the latter, nothing
worse than generating energy and interest just to have everyone
standing around--literally or virtually--saying "what are we doing
here." Given what usually happens to the efforts of planning
committees (cf the Optional Form of Local Government Committee report
acceptance) I can understand not wanting to stand in the firing line
alone, but there are those of us out here who want to participate and
are willing to listen to the considered opinions and
research of those with an expansive view and historical perspective
of our city and its needs.
Whatever we do, thanks for generating the issue.
Mike Curley
From: "Priscilla Salant"
<psalant@moscow.com> To: <vision2020@moscow.com> Subject:
What future for 2020? Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1998 15:37:33
-0700
Dear Visionaries,
As you know, Susan Palmer recently resigned from the three-person, Vision
2020 steering committee. Bill London and I are the two remaining members.
About two weeks ago, Bill asked on the listserve for a volunteer to replace
Susan. I'd like to report that we were inundated with responses, but this
wasn't the case. It seems a good time to think about a change in course.
I'm using this post to give you my ideas, in the hope that it will
stimulate discussion and eventually, some direction.
First, a little background on 2020 as I know it . . . (Please excuse the
length, but this is history, after all.)
I became involved about four years ago, before the listserve began, and
when the organization actually had fairly regular face-to-face meetings.
Suvia Judd, Steve Cooke, Kenton Bird, Dave Peckham, Bill London, Nels
Reese, and Susan Palmer were among the most active members working to
encourage more public information and debate about the future of Moscow and
Latah County. In March 1995, we developed a 2020 mission statement, which
is still part of the web page kindly donated by First Step Research.
Our activities over the last few years have included public forums and
workshops on community based planning and public participation methods
(facilitated by Tom Hudson); what was then the proposed Altura Business
Park; and Jon Miller and Steven Peterson's report, "Why is Moscow
Growing?". With the school district and library, we were also responsible
for the recent community retreat. I'm sure others can think of additional
activities that I've forgotten.
Those of you who have been in the area for more than a few years know that
Kenton Bird was a strong force behind much of what 2020 accomplished in its
early days. After he left Moscow for a position at Colorado State
University, we became more of a virtual organization, with fewer public
meetings and more electronic discussions. Susan, Bill, and I watched over
the listserve (as much as you ornery and spirited citizens need "watching
over"). We have continued to be involved in public issues related to
growth and development, but not on the same scale as in the past. It
worked well for the three of us to meet once a month (though weekly, almost
HOURLY it seemed, when we were planning the retreat).
With Susan gone, I think it's time to re-evaluate what 2020 is and should
be in the future. I'd like to throw out some questions for your
consideration and comment:
Should we be anything more than an electronic public forum? Is there
energy among us for reaching a wider audience on issues of growth and
development? For acting more and discussing less? I don't mean to
undervalue this forum - I believe it has made many important contributions,
but are we making a conscious decision to limit ourselves to this media?
Should we re-constitute the structure of 2020 so that the steering
committee consists of more than these two old-timers? (OK - so maybe we're
just middle aged, but I for one would appreciate a few new voices.)
Are there particular issues or projects in which 2020 is especially
well-suited to become involved?
Is it time for ... hold on ... a face to face discussion of where we should
be going in the future?
Respectfully,
Priscilla Salant
Mike Curley
reply to: curley@turbonet.com
208-882-3536
Back to TOC