[Vision2020] Challenge to the candidates: What's up with Weber & Lambert?

[Bill London]

As the chair of the V2020 candidate survey committee, I spoke directly with
both Weber and Lambert about their refusal to respond to the survey.

Weber refused because he does not want to use email.

Lambert refused because he planned to attend various candidate forums and
thought that was sufficient.

Because of their reasons for refusal, I would not vote for either candidate.

I think it is imperative that every council candidate be able to use email.
If not, that means that every communication and decision will have to have
an expensive paper copy created just for Weber.  That will cost the city
both time and money.

Lambert was quoted in the Daily News profile that he thought the city
actions were much too slow.  He wants to speed things up, so he wants to cut
the opportunities for citizen input.  He also is not interested in letting
the voters know his own priorities, so he did not want to provide a written
record in V2020 of his views.

BL


----- Original Message ----- 
From: <josephc at mail.wsu.edu>
To: "Donovan Arnold " <donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com>;
<vision2020 at moscow.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 15, 2005 2:23 PM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Challenge to the candidates: What's up with Weber
& Lambert?


> In spite of Donovan's comments, I repeat my point: Candidates for council
> are obligated to answer any and all questions from the public. To say
> otherwise is to suggest that council members work for only a select few.
> But they work for us all and as such candidates for council should answer
> to us all.
>
> I am aware that some questions are biased. In such instances, candidates
> have as an option to explain why they think a question cannot or should
> not be answered. Such a response would provide valuable information.
> Silence provides no information at all, and without information no one is
> in a position to make an informed decision.
>
> Weber and Lambert should respond to the questions asked by Vision 2020 or,
> if they feel as Donovan does, they should explain exactly why they find
> the Vision 2020 questions to be biased. Unlike Donovan, I just don't see
> this view as even plausible (note that Donovan provided no support for
> this view either) but I am open-minded. If Weber and Lambert can explain
> to me what's wrong with the questions I am more than willing to listen.
> What I can't listen to is silence!
>
> I don't want to find out the views of Weber and Lambert on, say, the Third
> Street bridge option after the election. I want to find out now and use
> this as a basis for determining whether or not they are the candidates
> that I want serving on council.
>
> A failure to respond is itself a response. It shows that one does not care
> about the concerns of at least a segment of the electorate. This does not
> bode well for one who wishes to serve the public.
>
> Joe Campbell
>
> _____________________________________________________
>  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
> ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
>