Re: No such promise

[WMSteed@aol.com]

In a message dated 9/1/01 8:50:32 PM, jporter@moscow.com writes:

<< It seems to me that Walter Steed and the Daily News editorial board are 
trying to manufacture a promise that wasn't made. >>

As did Priscilla Salant, I only quoted the Daily News editorial.  I attended 
some of the early meetings and recall comments such as "no taxes would be 
spent on the building."  Perhaps this is where the idea of no tax dollars 
being spent originated.  Recent city councils have limited such restriction 
on taxes to construction having realized the high cost of maintenance will 
require tax dollars.

<<I would also take issue with the phrasing "Moscow's City Council sold the 
1912 Center idea to the public ..." >>

I too found the editorial's use of the word "sold" unusual, as I have yet to 
believe even a majority of the public is behind the project.  But, without a 
vote, we'll never know will we?

<<Several years ago some generous citizens donated the land for East City 
Park.  Do Steed and the Daily News think the city should impose user fees 
to pay for park maintenance?>>

I certainly can't speak for the Daily News, but I have no problem with park 
maintenance being paid from taxes. (However, you can't use a state or federal 
park without paying admission anymore.)  My problem with the 1912 Building 
was and is the outrageous cost to renovate that particular building.  I 
supported the swimming pool, serving on the finance committee, even though at 
the time I didn't think I'd ever use it.  I would quite probably have 
supported a reasonably priced new community building done in a way that was 
not a fait accompli for the citizens of Moscow.

Walter Steed