Re: Letters to the Editor

["LuJane Nisse, Publisher" <lujane@lataheagle.com>]

I would not call it "reckless" spending if that money is designated for that
project and those contributing are doing so without anyone twisting their
arm. This building is gorgeous and will be a source of pride for this town
for many many years after all this bickering about it is forgotten. Sad that
we find it reckless to save that which is our heritage.

LuJane


----- Original Message -----
From: <WMSteed@aol.com>
To: <vision2020@moscow.com>
Sent: Monday, June 26, 2000 4:17 PM
Subject: Letters to the Editor


>
> In a message dated 6/26/00 2:29:13 PM, bill_london@hotmail.com writes:
>
> << The big difference is the amount of public money involved in the
creation
> of
> both facilities.  The Aquatics Center included private gifts (the land was
> donated), but was built with public money.  The 1912 Building will be
> created with private money (an amazing $2 million of private money is
> already in hand, and will be spent to begin the project).  For all of us,
> that's a good deal. >>
>
> Recklessly spending someone else's money is still reckless spending.  The
> pool was done by a bond issue vote.  A vote the city council refuses to
allow
> even as a measure of public opinion as to whether the 1912 project is
desired
> by the citizens; even with private funds.
>
> One other difference between the pool, which is wonderful and in use by
> hundreds of persons, and the 1912 building is that the city refused to go
> forward with it (or the skateboard park) until the available funds equaled
> the price to construct.  Why so reckless on the 1912 building?  Because
they
> are only $3,000,000 short?
>
> Walter Steed
>
>