[Vision2020] Fw: Re: Fw: Re: real economic development in Moscow

[Mark Solomon]

Wayne,

City decisions and issues do not live in a vacuum. Let's take the 
Third St. Bridge as an example. The Council has made the policy 
decision to build a pedestrian only bridge across the creek. Will you 
support that decision when it comes down to budgeting for it? Let's 
assume for the moment that $$ is available to be appropriated.

m.

At 9:40 AM -0700 10/28/07, jeanlivingston wrote:
>On behalf of Wayne Krauss, who does not subscribe to vision2020 but 
>who received from me my inquiry on the extent of his agreement with 
>Jeff Harkins regarding an assortment of issues, here is Wayne's 
>response:
>
>
>-----Original message-----
>
>From: "Wayne Krauss" wdkrauss at clearwire.net
>Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 09:05:02 -0700
>To: jeanlivingston jeanlivingston at turbonet.com
>Subject: Re: Fw: Re: [Vision2020] real economic development in Moscow
>
>Quoting jeanlivingston :
>>  Wayne, I brought you into a discussion on vision2020, and I'm
>>  sending it to you, so you can see it and have a chance to respond if
>>  you want, but I just got fired up over a bunch of issues that Jeff
>>  Harkins is pushing on vision2020 as essentially "bad decisions by
>>  council" that we are all suposed to recall when deciding how to
>>  vote. And of course, I didn't agree v! ery much, and threw out my
>>  contrary take for all to see, opposing Jeff. Anyway, at the end I
>>  said to Jeff, basically "you're Krauss' treasurer. How many of
>>  these so-called bad decisions of council, that we are supposed to
>>  recall, does he think were wrong?"
>>
>>  So I wasn't suggesting that you necessarily agreed with Jeff on all
>>  the things that Jeff thought was bad, but I was wondering if you
>>  did. I don't know if you monitor vision2020, but if you don't, I
>>  thought I'd let you know. I am curious on how much agreement you
>>  share with Jeff on the issues in the posts below. If you scroll to
>>  the bottom, you'll see his post, and mine follows, above it.
>>
>>  Bruce Livingston
>
>Bruce, thank you for allowing me to respond to your letter.
>
>The discussion between Jeff and Joe Campbell has to do with things 
>that have happened in the past and I prefe! r to look to the future. 
>I will remark on a couple of the items.
>
>First of all, let me state that Jeff is my treasurer, not my 
>advisor. His opinions are his own and do not always mirror my own.
>
>I think that the whole issue of the ice rink got way out of hand. 
>This could have been handled between the various agencies without 
>the threat of shutting down the ice rink and counter law suits. This 
>is a case where people should have sat down, agreed they had a 
>problem, identified the
>solutions and acted on them. This finally happened, but there was a 
>lot of pain in the mean time. I very much want to see a full size 
>ice rink in a permanent location.
>
>I do think the City has been in error in some of the discussion of 
>development in Whitman County. This is especially true when Mayor 
>Chaney stated that James Toyota should not be allowed to relocate in 
>the corridor because that type of business did not fit her vision.
>
>Unless the City is ready ! to spend a substantial amount of money on 
>prevention and enforcement, it should not establish unenforceable 
>ordinances, such as banning weapons from City property.
>
>As Linda said at the League of Women Voters forum, the City has 
>ruled on the Third Street Bridge. If it comes up again, I will look 
>at the traffic and engineering data, listen to all concerned 
>comments and make a decision I feel best benefits the entire City.
>
>Bruce, as I stated in my previous letter to you, I do not subscribe 
>to and very seldom monitor V2020 because of the demeaning and rude 
>responses by persons hiding behind an unknown identity. My parents 
>raised me to respect different opinions, no matter how much they 
>differ from my own. At the risk of being slayed by the written word, 
>I give permission to you to post my comments on V2020. I only ask 
>that you post all of my commentary.
>
>Thank You,
>
>Wayne Krauss
>
>
>Received: from pmail2c8.megamailservers.com ([69.49.106.133])
>	by mail.turbonet.com (Cactus Mail Server v9.0.0) with ESMTP id HAH24905
>	for <jeanlivingston at turbonet.com>; Sun, 28 Oct 2007 09:05:05 -0700
>Received: from pmail2c8.megamailservers.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
>	by pmail2c8.megamailservers.com (8.13.6.20060614/8.13.1) with ESMTP id
>	l9SG52IT016810
>	for <jeanlivingston at turbonet.com>; Sun, 28 Oct 2007 12:05:03 -0400
>Received: (from Unknown UID 600 at localhost)
>	by pmail2c8.megamailservers.com (8.13.6.20060614/8.12.2/Submit) id
>	l9SG52nO016809
>	for jeanlivingston at turbonet.com; Sun, 28 Oct 2007 12:05:02 -0400
>X-Authentication-Warning: pmail2c8.megamailservers.com: Unknown UID 600 set
>	sender to wdkrauss at clearwire.net using -f
>Received: from 74-60-60-133.lew.clearwire-dns.net
>	(74-60-60-133.lew.clearwire-dns.net [74.60.60.133]) by
>	email.clearwire.net (Webmail 2.0) with HTTP for
>	<wdkrauss.clearwire.net at email.clearwire.net>;
>	Sun, 28 Oct 2007 12:05:02 -0400
>Message-ID: <20071028120502.4zrnhuvfr480s04c at email.clearwire.net>
>Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 12:05:02 -0400
>From: "Wayne Krauss" <wdkrauss at clearwire.net>
>To: jeanlivingston <jeanlivingston at turbonet.com>
>Subject: Re: Fw: Re: [Vision2020] real economic development in Moscow
>References: <49fbb7532fe3d4bf01e92bf99b15a320 at turbonet.com>
>In-Reply-To: <49fbb7532fe3d4bf01e92bf99b15a320 at turbonet.com>
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain;
>	charset=UTF-8;
>	format="flowed"
>Content-Disposition: inline
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>User-Agent: Webmail 4.0
>X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.10 required=5.00 tests=BAYES_00=-0.11,
>	MR_NOT_ATTRIBUTED_IP=0.20, NO_RDNS2=0.01, MR_DIFF_MID=1.00
>	version=3.2.1
>X-Spam-Level: *
>X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.1 (1.0) on mail.turbonet.com
>
>Quoting jeanlivingston <jeanlivingston at turbonet.com>:
>
>>
>>
>>   Wayne, I brought you into a discussion on vision2020, and I'm
>>sending it to you, so you can see it and have a chance to respond if
>>you want, but I just got fired up over a bunch of issues that Jeff
>>Harkins is pushing on vision2020 as essentially "bad decisions by
>>council" that we are all suposed to recall when deciding how to
>>vote.  And of course, I didn't agree very much, and threw out my
>>contrary take for all to see, opposing Jeff.  Anyway, at the end I
>>said to Jeff, basically "you're Krauss' treasurer.  How many of
>>these so-called bad decisions of council, that we are supposed to
>>recall, does he think were wrong?"
>>
>>   So I wasn't suggesting that you necessarily agreed with Jeff on all
>>the things that Jeff thought was bad, but I was wondering if you
>>did.  I don't know if you monitor vision2020, but if you don't, I
>>thought I'd let you know.  I am curious on how much agreement you
>>share with Jeff on the issues in the posts below.  If you scroll to
>>the bottom, you'll see his post, and mine follows, above it.
>>   Bruce Livingston
>>
>>
>>
>>Bruce, thank you for allowing me to respond to your letter.
>
>The discussion between Jeff and Joe Campbell has to do with things that have
>happened in the past and I prefer to look to the future. I will 
>remark on a couple of the items.
>First of all, let me state that Jeff is my treasurer, not my advisor. His
>opinions are his own and do not always mirror my own.
>I think that the whole issue of the ice rink got way out of hand.  This could
>have been handled between the various agencies without the
>threat of  shutting down the ice rink and counter law suits.  This is a case
>where people should have sat down, agreed they had a problem, identified the
>solutions and acted on them.  This finally happened, but there was a 
>lot of pain
>in the mean time. I very much want to see a full size ice rink in a permanent
>location.
>I do think the City has been in error in some of the discussion of development
>in Whitman County.  This is especially true when Mayor Chaney stated that
>James Toyota should not be allowed to relocate in the corridor 
>because that type
>of business did not fit her vision.
>Unless the City is ready to spend a substantial amount of money on prevention
>and enforcement, it should not establish unenforceable ordinances, such as
>banning weapons from City property.
>As Linda said at the League of Women Voters forum, the City has ruled on the
>Third Street Bridge. If it comes up again, I will look at the traffic and
>engineering data, listen to all concerned comments and make a decision I feel
>best benefits the entire City.
>Bruce, as I stated in my previous letter to you, I do not subscribe 
>to and very
>seldom monitor V2020
>because of the demeaning and rude responses by persons hiding
>behind an unknown identity. My parents raised me to respect 
>different opinions,
>no matter how much they differ from my own. At the risk of being
>slayed by the written word, I give permission to you to post my comments on
>V2020. I only ask that you post all of my commentary.
>Thank You,
>
>Wayne Krauss