.
I promised that I would provide full publication of his responses. So, unedited, unchanged in any way, here's Mr. Leavitt's post.
Tim Leavitt said...
I appreciate the dialogue. Unfortunately, there are too many representatives that are inclined to simply dismiss or ignore dissenting arguments. I'll never suggest to somebody who disagrees with me that they should move out of town...
Now, to answer your questions:
1a) We agree that a new bridge is necessary. Just as important to me is the re-construction and improvement of all the interchanges.
1b) We agree that light rail should be included in the project. However, we differ on the terms of the inclusion.
1c) An advisory vote on light rail and related transit issues I think might provide the electeds and agency officials some valuable feedback to consider. No vote on the bridge/interchanges, with the current scenario.
1d) I am not aware that the City and The Columbian have agreed upon a purchase price for the building. Besides, not enough information has been provided to the City Council to make an educated decision about whether or not to purchase the building. A financial analysis of such a purchase will have to be quite persuasive in order for me to agree. Setting all of that aside, I FEEL that the City buying the nicest, newest building in downtown is not a message to deliver to our struggling families.
It is fair to say that of the thousands of issues we've voted on over the past six years, I believe Mr. Pollard and I have agreed on a vast majority. Where we have disagreed (and I have publicly expressed) is on the processes to which decisions were arrived at, as well as what my committment to our community is for the future.All I have time for right now...but will be back.
thanks
tim
7:03 PM
Again, I appreciate Mr. Leavitt's time on this issue.
Since he, apparently, has more to add, I will withhold comment until he does, in fact, come back.
No comments:
Post a Comment