[Vision2020] bid breakdown of construction costs
cjs
cjs at turbonet.com
Tue Apr 19 16:39:59 PDT 2005
This is sad. It took all of this nonsense to get the answer of "maybe" there is no 2 pieces of paper? It does raise the question if there is nothing in writing regarding how what when and why the 20.5 million dollar number was arrived at (in a cost estimate provided by the architect) then we need to ask why and how.
Also, on an earlier post you were seeking info on the "directive"
> > > > > given to the architect for the HS remodel. You are right that a
> > > > > "scope of work" would have been defined so quality and quantity
> > > > > could be reasonably known and an "opinion of probable cost" or a
> > > > > "cost estimate" could then be developed. I think you were
> > > > > interested in how the "scope of work" was defined.
This is the correct lingo. I think?
Well, let's start here.
1) Is there a "piece of paper" defining the "opinion of probable costs" or "scope of work" form the "architect" in how he derived at the "20.5 milion dollar remodel."
I gotta get me one of those books on how to properly address the school district, it's/my trustee and the likes.
Phil
:
> >
> >
> > > Phil:
> > > the process of choosing the architect didn't include, as best I recall> , "> bid" for the high
> > > school--see Mark Seman's post. It was about things like: have you don> e t> his before,
> > > where, what kind of building, would you charge us to look into our situ> ati> on, how much,
> > > etc. "Bids" would be for the actual construction. Check with the Supe> rin> tendent or
> > > Facilities Committee Chair for further information on the selection pro> ces> s of the
> > > architect.
> >
> > > Phil, I was part of the conversation with the architect--if he used the> wo> rd "directive" I
> > > won't complain about that. But no, it wasn't put it writing, but it wa> s c> ommunicated to
> > > the committee--and it is probably in the notes of that meeting, but I c> an'> t tell you exactly
> > > when that was--several years ago.
> >
> > So Mike, if you were present and know there is no paperwork or directive > (pieces of paper) then the estimate on the repairs of the existing HS is ju> st a number out of thin air? The 20.5 million dollar "estimate" and you exp> ect the public to accept this? Sounds like a sales pitch tool.
> >
> > > the auditorium isn't horrible, but it you want it to last another 80 ye> ars> and hold FOUR
> > > grades, not THREE, then it might be reasonable to rebuild it.
> >
> > Why do the school grades even have to be reconfigured? To substantiate th> e sales pitch for the new HS?
> >
> > > It isn't just that the high school is old, Phil. It isn't just age. Pa> rt > of it is sinking into the
> > > ground. It will require MAJOR expense to keep it going AS A SCHOOL for> th> e next 70-
> > > 100 years. I can't detail all the reasons here. That's why there was > a c> ommittee for ten
> > > years looking at the thing. There is information available somewhere t> hat> shows WHY
> > > virtually everyone who worked on the committee and studied the issue ag> ree> s that the
> > > best use of taxpayer money over the long haul is to do a major
> > > renovation/remodel/rebuild or a new high school on another site. Yes, > the> re is
> > > disageement about "keep it downtown v. outskirts of town" or exactly to> wh> at degree it
> > > needs to be remodeled, or if it's on the outskirts, is the Trail proper> ty > the best choice.
> > > But few who have taken the time to study it think that sinking more mon> ey > into the
> > > exisiting facility makes good economic sense in the long haul. And mos> t i> f not all of
> > > those people will have to help foot the bill for whatever is done--patc> h, > fix, build--and
> > > have NO vested interest in having a new school built.
> >
> > Every tax payer has a vested interest. Every tenant has a vested interest> . Every student has a vested interest. If it is sinking is it because our w> ater tables continue to drop? Last night city hall approved 7 new ball fiel> ds that are going to need watering by city water which is going to drop our> water table even more. Sorry I got out of content. Just had to tell ya.
> >
> > > The architect has done a great deal for free, whether ALL of it has bee> n f> ree I don't
> > > know. For example, have we paid for a plane ticket to come to Moscow--> out> of pocket
> > > expenses of other sorts? I don' t know.
> >
> > Mike - good question. How do I properly ask the right authority this ques> tion? What about the architects motel room and food? Is this public informa> tion? It should be if I am paying for it.
> >
> > > This BOND (it isn't a levy folks just to keep the terminology straight)> IS> NOT TIED TO
> > > THE TRAIL PROPERTY. I said that once before. Whether we buy MORE land> by> the
> > > existing facility (and rebuild/remodel it) does not reduce the cost of > reb> uilding. It just
> > > increases it. Maybe that's a good idea, but again, it doesn't seem to > hav> e anything to
> > > do with whether the exisiting facility is adequate for educational purp> ose> s right now or
> > > about what makes the best long-term economic sense for the taxpayers.
> >
> > If the Trail dirt is not tied to this levy/bond then why does all the inf> ormation I read talk about "a new high school on the Trail land?" Seriously> Mike. Look at your information from the open house. If the trail property > was not tied to this bond/levy then why are the four tracts not mentioning > a rebuild of the existing HS? Where and how did the 29 million dollar figur> e come about if the Trail dirt was not taken into consideration. In other w> ords the 29 million includes what we have to do to streets, etc. in conjunc> tion w/the Trail "gift."
> >
> > > I don't know where you get your information, but a quality facility can> be> built for $20M.
> > > Sure, if we put in sueded leather chairs for the students and pay what > the> military pays
> > > for a screwdriver, we might not get all the goodies we otherwise could.> B> ut the
> > > contractor will bid the project and will know that we have $20 M and th> at'> s it. Just like if
> > > you were building a new building. Tell you what. If the bond passes--> or > one in the
> > > future, volunteer your time for the committee that will submit the cons> tru> ction RFP and
> > > review the responses. They will welcome your tough-minded, tight-fiste> d a> pproach to
> > > the use of the community/taxpayer money for the benefit of the children> .
> >
> > You bet Mike. Please keep me informed.
> > >
> > > Thanks for the reasoned reply. I really appreciate it. And, thanks fo> r t> he invite. I want
> > > to be sure to order the friendly beer though. I assume you must have s> ome> "unfriendly"
> > > beer as well as the "political" beer. Don't want either of those.
> >
> > Well, Dear friend, looks like Jack is the answer. Tangle Ridge is my favo> rite.
> >
> > Thanks good buddy,
> > Phil
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Hope all is going well. Come by for that friendly beer sometime. Not a
> > > political beer.
> > >
> > > > Phil:
> > > > Until someone else answers to the contrary, I think I know the
> > > > answer to y> our question about the two pieces of paper. The
> > > > district sought architects for the pos> sible projects.
> > >
> > > Where are the other architects bids?
> > >
> > > > Once they chose a firm they TALKED to them. Yes, various district
> > > > personn> el or members of the committee may have sent pertinent
> > > > information to the archit> ects (such as the specs on existing
> > > > structures--sq. footage, class sizes, footprints,> etc), but as
> > > > hard as it might be to believe, I think the piece of paper you are
> > > > looking for > doesn't exist. Because I think the architects asked
> > > > the simple question (orally in a phon> e conversation or to the
> > > > Facilities Committee) "how do you want us to work up the remodel>
> > > > costs of the high school?" "Do you want us to compare apples to
> > > > apples--full scale rem> odel so there is as comparable a building at
> > > > that site as we could build at anothe> r site--OR, do you want us to
> > > > do some lesser degree of remodel--and if so what?" The ans> wer,
> > > > again given orally, was--"apples to apples."
> > >
> > > Mike, if you review the meeting minutes of FPC you will see indeed the
> > > chosen architect tells the public exactly what he was instructed to
> > > do. I think he used the word Directive. You, being an attorney could
> > > explain to me if a directive is a piece of paper or a verbal
> > > discussin. If it was a verbal discussion shouldn't it have been laid
> > > out in the minutes?
> > >
> > > There was nothing nefarious about that answer. Among other things,
> > > the ar> chitect said > that a remodel could include all or just part
> > > of the building, and even if> it included all, > were we to widen any
> > > classrooms, divide any space, make a different cafete> ria, etc. etc.
> > > > A multitude of choices. And, in anticipation of your next question,
> > > of co> urse, many > remodels could be done at LESS expense than
> > > building a new facility. That> seems > pretty obvious.
> > >
> > > Again Mike, it is clear in the architects words what he was isturcted
> > > to do and how to do it. He was "directed" to give the school district
> > > and the FPC a tool to ram down and sell to the public a new high
> > > school. Don't you see the rhetoric? The audotorium is horrible and
> > > needs completely replaced and in the next breath it is a wonderful
> > > audotorium. When people speak like this on a witness stand it is
> > > called perjury.
> > >
> > > > In looking at the best investment of taxpayer money over the LONG
> > > > haul, th> e facility is going to be a quality learning environment
> > > > AT LESS ANNUAL COST FOR MORE YEARS if it is "remodeled" to "new"
> > > > standards.
> > >
> > > You made referance to my building once. It is 33 years older than the
> > > current high school. I have been told by the city building inspectors
> > > that due to my hard work and care for my building it's chronological
> > > age is between 8 and 20 years. There was also a mention about the
> > > "band aid" approach. Eventually if you keep fixing something that is
> > > broken you will finally end up with something like what I have.
> > >
> > > > If there had only been one other remodel option it would have made
> > > > sense t> o ask for a comparative figure. But, since there were a
> > > > gillion options to have "pric> ed," and none of them appeared to
> > > > make sense as a better long-term investment of taxpayer f> unds, it
> > > > didn't make much sense to ask for all of them--and the architects
> > > > would ha> ve required payment in all probability.
> > >
> > > Are you stating that this architect has been doing all this work for
> > > free? What happens when the bond doesn't pass? Yes Mike, I know your
> > > vote will cancel my vote. But Donovans vote will cancel that. And
> > > etc., etc.
> > >
> > > In summary: I think the district should have at least looked at the
> > > eminent domain of the 5 buildings on the west end of the school. I
> > > heard somewhere that Dave Trail has interest or works in or something
> > > like that of one of these buildings. Was this even addressed ina ny
> > > meeting? Don't you think the Trails could offer a better 40 acxes?
> > > Where all the acreage "gifted" or sold or whatever could all be used?
> > > It appears to me that the gifted/donated/whatever dirt is the worst
> > > dirt that they own. Could be wrong that is only my opinion. There is
> > > no way any person in their right mind can vote for this levy because
> > > we all know they can't build this magnitude for 20 million. What is
> > > the legal terminology if they start to build the high school and run
> > > out of money where the inumbrance is passed along to the tax payer
> > > automatically. No vote needed? Maybe the public should be aware of
> > > this as this would sure dampen my vot for the levy. In other words it
> > > is a blank check.
> > >
> > > It has been a pleasure as always,
> > > Phil
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 19 Apr 2005 at 10:10, cjs wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Thank you Mark for such a "grown up" answer.
> > > >
> > > > You are the architect and know the direct lingo. I am not. I
> > > > appreciate you taking the time to clarify what is the proper
> > > > terminology and lingo.
> > > >
> > > > What I am looking for is a piece of paper from the school board
> > > > and/or the facilites committee to the architect asking him for a
> > > > cost estimate of what the cost would be in remodeling the current
> > > > HS. I understand this piece of paper is called a "directive." After
> > > > the architect receives this piece of paper he then responds by
> > > > giving another piece of paper to the asking party with a cost
> > > > breakdown of how he arrived at the remodel cost of 20.5 million. In
> > > > other words, the breakdown of the 20.5 million dollars it would cost
> > > > to remodel the existing HS.
> > > >
> > > > If you could be so kind, since you know the correct language, could
> > > > you tell me how then I should be asking for these two pieces of
> > > > paper?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks Mark,
> > > > Phil
> > > >
> > > > -----Original message-----
> > > > From: "Mark Seman" FCS at Moscow.com
> > > > Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 10:00:29 -0700
> > > > To: "cjs" cjs at turbonet.com
> > > > Subject: RE: [Vision2020] bid breakdown of construction costs
> > > >
> > > > > Phil, et al;
> > > > > I feel a need to chime in here for a bit to provide some
> > > > > clarification on terminology being tossed about. Architects often
> > > > > develop "opinions of probable costs" or "cost estimates" - very,
> > > > > very rarely do we have anything to do with developing "bids." To
> > > > > lay people this may seem like a minor issue, but when using any
> > > > > industry lingo, nuances are inherent within the language and to be
> > > > > on the same page, people need to use & understand the same
> > > > > terminology. To me, a "bid" are very different from a "cost
> > > > > estimate" or an "opinion of probable cost."
> > > > >
> > > > > "Construction costs" are those direct costs of permits,
> > > > > landfill/disposal, materials, labor and equipment to build a
> > > > > facility. "Project costs" will include "construction costs" and
> > > > > many other costs - potentially: architectural & engineering (A/E)
> > > > > fees, land acquisition, legal fees, soils testing, etc.
> > > > >
> > > > > Also, on an earlier post you were seeking info on the "directive"
> > > > > given to the architect for the HS remodel. You are right that a
> > > > > "scope of work" would have been defined so quality and quantity
> > > > > could be reasonably known and an "opinion of probable cost" or a
> > > > > "cost estimate" could then be developed. I think you were
> > > > > interested in how the "scope of work" was defined.
> > > > >
> > > > > Mark
> > > > >
> > > > > Mark Seman, Architect
> > > > > Heather Seman, Landscape Architect
> > > > > 1404 East 'F' Street Moscow, Idaho 83843
> > > > > v 208-883-3276 / f 208-883-0112
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com
> > > > > [mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com]On Behalf Of cjs
> > > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2005 9:02 AM
> > > > > To: keely emerinemix
> > > > > Cc: VISION2020 at moscow.com
> > > > > Subject: [Vision2020] bid breakdown of construction costs
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Keely,
> > > > >
> > > > > Could you ask Hummel architects for the "bid breakdown" of
> > > > > construction costs for the "new HS" PLEASE? Please do not say ask
> > > > > them yourself. Many of us have and will not even get a return
> > > > > phone call. Should I "officially" ask the school board for it?
> > > > >
> > > > > Phil
> > > > >
> > > > > -----Original message-----
> > > > > From: "keely emerinemix" kjajmix1 at msn.com
> > > > > Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 07:33:33 -0700
> > > > > To: donovanarnold at hotmail.com
> > > > > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Bond Levy for New University Of Idaho
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Donovan, please keep in mind that no one is saying that the
> > > > > > current HS building is falling down, decrepit or unsafe
> > > > > > structurally -- there are security concerns from its layout, but
> > > > > > I think you are confused on this point. What we're saying is
> > > > > > that it's educationally unsuitable for
> > > > > reasons
> > > > > > far too numerous to go into again now, at least before morning
> > > > > > coffee.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You might want to check through the information that I'm sure
> > > > > > you gathered during the two-year facilities process before you
> > > > > > quite possibly make a decision on an incorrect premise. Gosh,
> > > > > > even the information you could
> > > > > have
> > > > > > gotten since February should be sufficient, in case I'm mistaken
> > > > > > regarding the level of your prior interest and involvement.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > keely
> > > > > >
> > > > > > From: "Donovan Arnold" <donovanarnold at hotmail.com>
> > > > > > To: pkraut at moscow.com, vision2020 at moscow.com
> > > > > > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Bond Levy for New University Of Idaho
> > > > > > Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 22:28:27 -0700
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think you just want a new High School, even if it is
> > > > > > unfinished. If you cared about the safety of the kids, and
> > > > > > really thought the building was
> > > > > old
> > > > > > and unsafe you would not tolerate the occupancy of other
> > > > > > students in that buildings. If it is unsafe for the regular
> > > > > > teens now, it should also be unsafe for teen age alternative
> > > > > > high school students too. That is no brainier.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Take Care,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Donovan J Arnold
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >From: "Pat Kraut" <pkraut at moscow.com>
> > > > > > >To: "vision2020" <vision2020 at moscow.com>
> > > > > > >Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Bond Levy for New University Of Idaho
> > > > > > >Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 20:15:24 -0700
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >What it will cost and how much needs to be changed for grade
> > > > > > >school children is very different from teens. I really do think
> > > > > > >you are just trying to be as difficult as possible. PK
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > >From: "Donovan Arnold" <donovanarnold at hotmail.com>
> > > > > > >To: <pkraut at moscow.com>; <vision2020 at moscow.com>
> > > > > > >Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005 3:22 PM
> > > > > > >Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Bond Levy for New University Of Idaho
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >Pat,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >I think you missed the logic bus. The "unsafe building" you are
> > > > > > >referring to is going to be the home for elementary children
> > > > > > >and later alternative
> > > > > high
> > > > > > >school students.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >Under your thinking are we not putting elementary children in
> > > > > > >harms way instead of teenagers? Who would you rather have in an
> > > > > > >unsafe building
> > > > > Pat,
> > > > > > >a
> > > > > > >6 year old, or a 16 year old?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >Take Care,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >Donovan J Arnold
> > > > > > >PS, for the record, I do not think the building is unsafe, it
> > > > > > >was Ms.
> > > > > Kraut
> > > > > > >that has stated this. I know the MSD would not permit our
> > > > > > >children in an unsafe HS.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >From: "Pat Kraut" <pkraut at moscow.com>
> > > > > > > >To: "vision2020" <vision2020 at moscow.com>
> > > > > > > >Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Bond Levy for New University Of
> > > > > > > >Idaho Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 14:20:09 -0700
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >My children attended Troy Idaho schools in the late 70's to
> > > > > > > >early 80's
> > > > > > >when
> > > > > > > >they had tried to 'remodel' the school. One of the boys
> > > > > > > >attened a
> > > > > 'gifted
> > > > > > > >and talented class' in the furnace room! But, there were
> > > > > > > >those who
> > > > > > >insisted
> > > > > > > >that the building was 'good enough' then. The building is old
> > > > > > > >in so
> > > > > many
> > > > > > > >ways that it isn't safe! We need a new school! Our taxes,
> > > > > > > >rents all
> > > > > will
> > > > > > >go
> > > > > > > >up no matter what we do. My hope is to pay for something that
> > > > > > > >I really
> > > > > > >want
> > > > > > > >and not another 1912 building so I will be voting for the new
> > > > > > > >school. PK
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > > > From: DonaldH675 at aol.com
> > > > > > > > To: donovanarnold at hotmail.com ; vision2020 at moscow.com
> > > > > > > > Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005 7:49 AM Subject: Re:
> > > > > > > > [Vision2020] Bond Levy for New University Of Idaho
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Dear Donovan'
> > > > > > > > I worked at facilities as the university engineer
> > > > > > > > responsible for
> > > > > > > >reviewing new building plans for mechanical/electrical
> > > > > > > >installation and
> > > > > > >to
> > > > > > > >provide input on the same subjects as well as utility
> > > > > > > >upgrades
> > > > > > >(electrical,
> > > > > > > >water, sewer, power plant, etc.) for several years (20) and
> > > > > > > >if you
> > > > > would
> > > > > > > >like to check the records you will find that virtually
> > > > > > > >everyone of your reasons for the supposed "new University of
> > > > > > > >Idaho" are true. Why do you think we tore down so many old
> > > > > > > >buildings and opted to build new rather
> > > > > > >than
> > > > > > > >remodel? And just for starters I seriously doubt that you
> > > > > > > >could even
> > > > > fix
> > > > > > > >all of the deficiencies of the present buildings for the
> > > > > > > >amount you
> > > > > have
> > > > > > > >proposed let alone build a new campus. When I retired about
> > > > > > > >six years
> > > > > ago
> > > > > > > >the documented deferred maintenance list exceeded 300,000,000
> > > > > > > >dollars.
> > > > > > > > As a facilities person I would like to ask you a question?
> > > > > > > > Do you
> > > > > > >repair
> > > > > > > >your cars over and over and over until they are absolutely so
> > > > > > > >out of
> > > > > date
> > > > > > > >that they are no longer functional or do you buy a newer car
> > > > > > > >when the
> > > > > old
> > > > > > > >one no longer meets your needs? Buildings follow the same
> > > > > > > >functional obsolescence pattern and need to be replaced when
> > > > > > > >they no longer meet
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > >needs of the present.
> > > > > > > > My wife attended Moscow High School in the late 50's/early
> > > > > > > > 60's and
> > > > > it
> > > > > > > >was inadequate then so they remodeled. It remained
> > > > > > > >inadequate.
> > > > > > > > My children attended Moscow High School in the 80's and
> > > > > > > > 90's and it
> > > > > > >was
> > > > > > > >inadequate then so they remodeled. It was still inadequate.
> > > > > > > > My grandchildren are attending now and it is still
> > > > > > > > inadequate and
> > > > > > >people
> > > > > > > >still think they can fix it by remodeling. In my mind taking
> > > > > > > >the same action over and over and expecting different results
> > > > > > > >are a good
> > > > > > >definition
> > > > > > > >of delusion if not outright mental illness or maybe just
> > > > > > > >plain
> > > > > ignorance.
> > > > > > > > I also have some problems with the current bond plan but
> > > > > > > > am willing
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > >continue the mental illness with Russell and West Park (why
> > > > > > > >are we remodeling two ugly, functionally obsolescent
> > > > > > > >buildings when for
> > > > > roughly
> > > > > > > >the same money we could get a new elementary school) if we
> > > > > > > >get one new facility. In my opinion the only justification
> > > > > > > >for remodeling is a
> > > > > > >historic
> > > > > > > >example of a particular style of architecture or an old
> > > > > > > >building that
> > > > > is
> > > > > > >so
> > > > > > > >well built that the remodel can bring it to modern standards
> > > > > > > >of functionality.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Don Huskey
> > > > > > > > Captain, USMC (Ret)
> > > > > > > > BSEE, MPA, MBA
> > > > > > > > "One cannot level one's moral lance at every evil in the
> > > > > > > > universe.
> > > > > > >There
> > > > > > > >are just too many of them. But you can do something, and the
> > > > > > > >difference between doing something and doing nothing is
> > > > > > > >everything." Daniel
> > > > > Berrigan
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >-----------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > >-- --------
> > > > > > >---
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > _____________________________________________________
> > > > > > > > List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > > > > > > > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> > > > > > > > http://www.fsr.net
> > > > > > > > mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> > > > > > > > /////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> > > > > > > >_____________________________________________________
> > > > > > > > List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > > > > > > > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> > > > > > > > http://www.fsr.net
> > > > > > > > mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> > > > > > > >/////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >_____________________________________________________
> > > > > > > List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > > > > > > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> > > > > > > http://www.fsr.net
> > > > > > > mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> > > > > > >/////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _____________________________________________________
> > > > > > List services made available by First Step Internet, serving the
> > > > > communities
> > > > > > of the Palouse since 1994. http://www.fsr.net
> > > > > > mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> > > > > > /////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ________________________________________________________________
> > > > > > _ FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar get it now!
> > > > > > http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _____________________________________________________
> > > > > > List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > > > > > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> > > > > > http://www.fsr.net
> > > > > > mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> > > > > > /////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> > > > >
> > > > > _____________________________________________________
> > > > > List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > > > > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> > > > > http://www.fsr.net
> > > > > mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> > > > > /////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > _____________________________________________________
> > > > List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > > > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> > > > http://www.fsr.net
> > > > mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> > > > ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯> ¯> ¯> ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯> ¯¯> ¯¯> ¯¯¯
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > _____________________________________________________
> > List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> > http://www.fsr.net
> > mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> > ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯> ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯> ¯¯¯¯
> >
More information about the Vision2020
mailing list