Re: Moscow-Pullman Corridor: A Modest Proposal

[Linda Pall <lpall@moscow.com>]

>Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1999 08:16:07 -0800
>To: PhilCooper@webtv.net (Philip Cooper)
>From: Linda Pall <lpall@moscow.com>
>Subject: Re: Moscow-Pullman Corridor: A Modest Proposal
>
>Dear Phil Cooper, Ken Medlin and Visionaries,
>
>I can't buy the 'publicity is the only avenue' alternative. I have seen
other collaborative strategies, such as I have suggested, work and frankly
it is essential that we TRY to bring the decision makers about the corridor,
public and private, together. This does not insure your perspective or mine
will prevail in the structuring of the development rules but it assures that
we have the opportunity to reason together.
>
>There may be those of you who believe that the 'reason together' route just
involves capitulation. I do not. I think it is essential to listen to the
variety of views and perspectives and sort from among them the values,
ideas, and proposals that will provide guidance for public officials, beyond
just a clutch of self interested folks.
>
>I believe we can identify the players, as Ken suggests. We may not be able
to have each and every one around the table but if such a proposal is really
embraced by the Whitman County Commission and has the cooperation and
support of the Universities and the cities, I believe that it would be in
everyone's interest to be present and accounted for when the discussion of
the corridor development rules are under discussion.
>
>Wouldn't it be a better course of action to get developers, designers,
policy makers and citizens together to address this issue than depending on
publicity alone to create consensus? I support continuing and lively
discussion of these issues and exposure of idiocy and wrong doing when and
where it occurs... I still think that the prospect of getting together over
the future of the corridor is worth the effort. 
>
>Thanks to both you and Ken for your comments.
>
>All the best, 
>Linda Pall
>Moscow City Council Member
>
>At 06:07 AM 3/22/99 -0500, you wrote:
>>Ken, right on-target.  The developers and corporations don't give a hoot
>>for the average citizen's concern's/input -- the average citizen voicing
>>concern is only viewed as an annoyance, an obstacle to the bottom
>>line....a tidy profit.  Getting the issue into  a very public forum
>>(media, 2020, etc) and regularly is the only way to apply continuous
>>mouting pressure -- they and the politicians (local or otherwise)  they
>>have in their back pockets, fear negative publicity -- and often times
>>that doesn't even work.
>>
>>PC
>>
>>
>