vision2020
Re: Where's the debate?
Dear Evan,
This is a response to your concerns about the LWV Forum to occur Thursday
evening.
#1. I'm not moderating it this time so perhaps you will find Christopher
Stream more in the mold of Greg Brown than I was. If things get too dull
you can always carry out your ice cube threat.
#2. Eat dinner before you get to the forum. If it's bad, you have none but
yourself to blame. Or maybe Nancy, but I'd be careful about that.
#3. I have to wonder why you waited till the last minute (week) to discuss
a change in the format. If you feel it's grossly inadequate it would have
been helpful to have had your input early. Frankly, I think it would be a
lot of fun to have a prolonged debate which might get really rambunctious:
someone would have to assure that all candidates were treated equitably of
course. But whatever we might do in the future will be the decision of
League members. Obviously changes should be made based on the
recommendations from those persons who attend the forum. Anyway, if you are
planning to storm the Bastille on Thursday evening, be warned, somebody just
might have a guillotine ready on the other side.
#4. And last, I think, other voters might not be as swayed by a prolonged
evening as you and I. Many are the reasons people choose one candidate over
another--eloquence and articulation are only two. It may even be
appropriate to recall that Douglas won the debate and the senate seat, but
Lincoln beat him anyway for the presidency.
#5. And really last, your musings about your vision for Moscow are
compelling. I appreciated them. But I bet you won't see six neckties.
Maybe five or even four.
Looking forward to Thursday evening.
Sue Hovey
----- Original Message -----
From: Nancy Holmes <ncmholmes@moscow.com>
To: <vision2020@moscow.com>
Sent: Friday, October 22, 1999 1:06 AM
Subject: Where's the debate?
> Dear Visionaries;
>
> This contest for the Moscow city council has certainly got off to a slow
> start. I'm sure there must be a lot of rubbing shoulders behind the scenes
> but I guess I was hoping for more to occur out in the open. I've been too
> busy roofing to rub shoulders. Plus it would be dangerous to do that on a
> 12/12 pitch. In fact, that is probably indicative of decision-making in
> Moscow anyway. It's like being up in the cheap seats trying to figure out
> what is going on in a huddle of referees down at the fifty yard line. Here
> in Moscow we often won't know the score until the game is almost over.
>
> The Chamber of Commerce luncheon was fairly well attended (even 75% of the
> candidates appeared) but quite frankly, the rules of engagement didn't
> allow for any engagement. They served us a nice little chicken filet, an
> arrangement of steamed vegetables and some browned herbed potato cubes. It
> would have been good stuff for a food fight but I don't think that was
> allowed either. I was pleased by the professional deportment and public
> speaking ability of each of the candidates but nothing was said to upset
> the status quo. In many cases you would have to be pretty well versed in
> the issues and make some logical inferences in order to differentiate
> between candidates. You could have made your choice based on neckties -
> three had them, three didn't.
>
> My thanks to those of you who have shown an interest in this election
> through this medium. I remember some questions arising from the Danahys
and
> from Linda Pall and I have put off answering them until now. The League of
> Women Voters forum next Thursday promises to follow the same format as the
> Chamber of Commerce. It is grossly inadequate. Perhaps if enough of us ask
> nicely (like they did when they stormed the Bastille) we could get that
> changed. The three minutes for introduction is inadequate and the timed
one
> minute response to questions is ludicrous. I would prefer having a
> moderator with a gavel and absolute authority who would allow someone to
> speak until their point was clear. I miss Greg Brown - he could serve us
> well in this capacity. If people don't want to stay to listen then they
can
> go home. I have to assume that those who come have an interest in hearing
> what the candidates have to say. There are not more forums or more
> opportunities - except, perhaps, this one. Let us discuss issues well into
> the wee hours; we're tough enough for that. If we can't change things I'll
> be there and do my best anyway but don't bet against me slipping an ice
> cube into Mike Curley's boxer shorts. Otherwise you won't see any lines
> drawn in the sand at this meeting, either - although I'm betting on six
> neckties.
>
> The Danahys asked about the prospect of rising taxes and retaining or
> creating a Moscow that is a safe harbor for teenagers. Good questions. I
> pay taxes and I have two prospective teenagers.
> Yes, taxes will go up. Even if there is no increase in services,
taxes
> will go up. Retained employees receive wage increases. Materials and
> supplies cost more. This year the city of Moscow will spend approximately
> $1500 per resident. Although there is a lot of hocus pocus out there
> concerning sources of and collection of revenues, as you know, it all
> ultimately originates from the individual consumer-resident and trickles
> up. That $1500 compares favorably to what most people will spend for food
&
> eating, for cars and transportation, for insurance, for housing and far
> less than many will spend on recreation and entertainment. Next year the
> city budget will nudge the $40 million mark ($2000 per resident) because
of
> the water-sewer infrastructure investments. In fact, about half of what
the
> city will spend next year is for supplying water to and removing sewage
> from the residences and businesses. If we plan to search through the
budget
> for significant ways to save money we might hope that one of the
candidates
> identifies himself as a magician. I'm merely a wizard so I don't see much
> room to give. In fact, I see the opposite. We underpay many employees,
> especially in the public safety arena. Even our chief of police, Dan
> Weaver, receives noticeably less compensation than other comparable
> division heads in the city hierarchy. Long ago police work was treated as
a
> blue collar profession and in many places it has not escaped that stigma
> and pays accordingly.
>
> Teenagers are subject to a lot of influences and I often question
> whether it is better to let them see life as it is and trust them to make
> good choices or shelter them in some ways and let them transition more
> slowly toward our adult constructs. Relatively speaking, Moscow is a
> shelter, so statistically our teenagers have a better chance to transition
> without harm. I would work to prevent that from changing - we make our
kids
> grow up too fast anyway. A big concern about teenagers is drugs and I
can't
> fight that much no matter how lofty a council seat might seem. Our
> economics and culture are significantly influenced by pharmaceutical
> companies who, mostly in the name of profit, advertise the benefits of
> chemical partnerships in every aspect of life. We might be able to defeat
> them if every one of us reduces their influence by minimizing consumption
> of their products and then laughing when we outlive all of their CEO's
> anyway. And it is probably better in the long run to teach children,
> beginning at a young age, that drugs are sometimes a necessary evil but
not
> that they are a solution. You should read this opinion three times a day
> with a glass of water and if symptoms of paranoia don't begin to appear
> within a week then read it some more but skip the water.
>
> Linda was curious about what our ideas are for handling development
> issues and how we feel about the 1912 building. You can get an
introduction
> to my views on development in the answers to the V2020 questions to
> candidates. But I might as well diverge into the topic of growth. For
those
> of you who are proponents of a 2 to 3 percent growth rate I'd guarantee
> that if that was promoted and accomplished beginning in the 1960's or
> earlier, you probably wouldn't by choice be living here now. By my
> calculations Moscow has averaged a one percent growth rate over the last
> fifty years, maybe slightly less. At some point sheer numbers matter more
> than percentages and we may have reached that plateau. Maybe the average
> population increase of 150 per year over the past half century in a good
> benchmark. Assuming we covet any growth we should make sure we've decided
> specifically where to put it. Also, keep in mind that if our state and
> region encourages growth that we will feel some of the effects even if we
> slam the door locally; for instance, think of traffic on Hwys 8 and 95.
> The purchase of the city block containing the 1912 building was a
good
> buy. The $4 million conversion price tag is hefty and I'd say it was
> ridiculous to even consider if not for the likely prospect that the money
> will come privately. Fund raising has begun so don't be surprised when you
> start hearing the "1912 overture". All that is left to debate really is
the
> cost of maintenance and operation. Yes, the city coffers will be used. By
> my calculations for a building of this size, value and purposes we should
> ante $40K per year to a cyclic maintenance fund and $60K to $80K more for
> utilities, operations and routine maintenance. I think the city and its
> residents will benefit by at least that amount - it comes out to fifty
> cents per resident per month. Less if some of the costs are offset by
> revenue gathering measures such as user fees. Maybe we can make that
> payment voluntary. Those households that absolutely refuse to pay the 50
> cents per head wouldn't have to do so and members must avert their gaze
> when passing the building. Others would have to pay a little more and may
> even be allowed to enter.
>
> Thanks again for your attention. Questions or comments are welcome
> here (even if anonymous!) or you can call me at 883-4918.
>
> - Evan Holmes
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Back to TOC