[Vision2020] Peg Hamlett's Daily News Article

[Tom Ivie]

Did any of you catch the article on Peg Hamlett in last night's paper?  Peg will probably say that she was mis-quoted, but I highly doubt it given the level of reporter Alexis is. In regards to the ball fields and Third Street issue, she is quoted as saying 

"I think a lot of people who are upset about these things aren't interested in becoming involved in the community."  She appears to be saying that "You are either in favor of the Third Street bridge and the Palouse River Drive sports complex or you do not support your community."  How about being inclusive in discussions?  By not being inclusive to constituents, Peg is not involving the community. Isn’t citizen involvement usually a response to the weakness or failure on the part of existing government? A person thinks, “I could do better.” So they decide to run.  Unless of course it is solely a matter of EGO.

 

I find it interesting that Peg states, "We have to get past the divisions in this community and listen to each other" and then two paragraphs later makes a divisive statement.  She says that there is a communication problem but she has been on Council 8 yrs and hasn't done anything to solve the problem!  She admits that the division stems from ineffective communication between city leaders and residents.  Has she not been a "city leader" for the last 8 yrs?  Is she admitting she is an ineffective communicator?  Peg cites her leadership experience as a reason to vote for her.  Did I miss something?!  In this election, saying “divisive” seems to be the semantic equivalent of national politicians recklessly throwing around the terms “terrorist” and “unpatriotic”.  It means nothing, but serves to shut up public debate, and specifically the asking of questions concerning failures of existing government.  Does Peg mean to say that disagreeing with the powers that be is by definiti!
 on
 divisive?  If so, why do we even bother to have elections?  This seems to suggest a fairly undemocratic understanding of American civic and political culture.    

 

Peg's last statement is this: "We need to hear from all sides. At the heart of this are people who really want what's best for the community."  So which people are these? Are these the same ones she accused of not being interested in becoming involved?  Or are these the people who are "getting upset......and the information they've been given is false?" Does Peg suggest that those who are upset don't really want what's best for the community?  Come on, give us more credit than that.  I didn’t happen to see Peg at the Saturday morning New Cities meeting.  Does that mean that she doesn’t care?  Oh wait!  By her definition, that would mean that she does care.  By her definition, I and others don’t, because we were there and spoke up about our “vision” of Moscow. 

 

Many good things can come from citizens speaking up.  We now have Civil Rights because people spoke up.  Before someone decided to speak up, women couldn’t vote (let alone run for Mayor).  Wrongs can be righted when people speak up.  If no one were to have listened when these people spoke up, what kind of place would we live in now?  The same is true with local issues.  

 

Nancy Chaney is in favor of the ball fields but is interested in making the so-called "sports complex" fit well with the neighborhood.  That involves listening.  Listening to what others have to say; not saying that we aren’t interested in being involved in the community.  I believe I am more involved now than ever since these two issues have become “issues”.  And yes, people do vote on single issues.  To avoid that fact and skirt the issues is only condescending and arrogant.  Peg has to listen to everyone, not just what she thinks is “worthy”.  By her not listening, she is excluding her constituency and is herself being divisive.  

-Tom Ivie


		
---------------------------------
 Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20051101/7297cd9b/attachment.htm