Re: Councilman Johnson's Departure

["Steve Busch" <steveb@moscow.com>]

As I mentioned in a previous posting, I am trying to decide how to use the
Vision2020 format.  I'm still not sure.  I can see that one must be very
careful about the choice of words used in any comment.  Apparently, I need
to expound on my usage of the terms "team" and "get along".

The City Council needs to represent all of the citizens of Moscow.  From
time to time we will not agree on a particular subject.  When that happens,
each council person needs to vigorously defend his/her position.  But as a
group, we must not lose sight of the fact that we should be trying to make
Moscow a better place to live for everyone.  We need to be able to disagree
without being disagreeable.  Each Council person should be respectful of the
other members.  It was in this context that I used team and get along.

I think it would be unfortunate if the
----- Original Message -----
From: Ken Medlin <dev-plan@moscow.com>
To: Steve Busch <steveb@moscow.com>; Moscow Vision 2020
<vision2020@moscow.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 25, 1999 12:13 PM
Subject: Re: Councilman Johnson's Departure


> >
> >In my opinion, it would be best if the Mayor nominates someone that would
> >be unanimously approved by the Council.
> Does this statement reflect a principle of representative government?  Or
> does it reflect the dynamics of political influence within a governing
> body? We just had an election in which a lot of votes for candidates
> espousing certain ideas different from those held by the elected reflect
> a substantial body of opinion. The mayor legally has the prerogative of
> selecting whom he chooses, assuming he can persuade council to go along.
> Such a decision might produce a batter "team" that can get along -- but
> is that what representative government is about? I doubt that very much,
> for "getting along" may not be in the best interests of the total
> community. What does matter, is that the community sentiments be
> recognized in toto,  that the interests of the whole community be well
> served and that government seek to promote consensus in the community, to
> avoid divisiveness and loss of opportunities. Then, we have a chance to
> promote policies that serve the general interest, rather than policies
> coming from a group that "gets along" well, but for whose benefit? You
> are confusing what may best serve a so-called well functioning team with
> what the total community meeds as representation in decisions about its
> monies, resources and institutions.  How can a unified "team" respond to
> that purpose? It almost seems that a strategy on this matter has already
> been played out to some extent. We should hear Linda Pall and Tom LeClair
> on the issue, as well as Steve Busch.  Thanks for being frank and open
> about your political philosophy.   Ken M.
>
> ------------------------
> William K. Medlin
> Dev-plan associates
> 930 Kenneth Street
> Moscow ID 83843
> 208/892-0148
> dev-plan@moscow.com
>