Dear Matt, Well please clear up the question as to whether or not Smart Growth and a subsequent BFW involvement is meant to be "only advisory" on land use and land rights? Otherwise, it is COERCIVE to those with other ideas? And if cumpulsory, how can the use of my adjective be a "loaded" term?
Eric Matt Logan wrote: > Eric, > > The reason you are seeing "every word trigger a thread going off at > ninety degrees" is because of your use of such phrases as "coercive land > planning" to describe Smart Growth. This is in effect an invitation to > debate the applicability of that phrase, and you should not be surprised > when your use language in this way triggers such debates in the future. > > The way to get people to read just what you were asking Richard Schwinn > is to just ask him without loading up your message with what most bikies > consider provocative language. > > Good luck. > > - Matt Logan. > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Eric Westhagen > Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2007 4:40 PM > To: Schimpff, Jeff A - DNR; BikiesSubmissions > Subject: Re: [Bikies] Vagueness in "Smart Growth" Statements > > Dear Jeff Schimpff, > > Without sounding "redundant", maybe you should read just what I was > asking > Richard Schwinn-----and it wasn't a continuation of just what is or > isn't > coercive land planning, called--Smart Growth! Does every word trigger a > thread going off at "ninety degrees?" Maybe you will break into another > description of the global warming controversy or "peak oil?" > > EW > > "Schimpff, Jeff A - DNR" wrote: > > > > > > > It sounds like someone would like to know more about comprehensive > > planning in Wisconsin, sometimes referred to as "smart growth." Here > at > > the link below is a brief, good summary of what state law requires. > > > > Aside from requiring that a few paragraphs and maps be included in a > > plan to describe the current conditions and future desired conditions > of > > a community, regarding 8 or 9 elements that are common to good land > use > > plans everywhere, and a requirement that plans be reviewed every ten > > years, there is nothing "coercive" or prescriptive about comprehensive > > planning as required by the Wisconsin legislature. > > > > All the details are left up to local citizens and their elected > > representatives. Your local plan stinks? Property rights being > > trampled? Your community is a lousy place to live or do business? > Then > > clean out "city hall" and start over. This does not fit even the > > loosest concept of a "coercive" system: > > > > http://learningstore.uwex.edu/pdf/G3749.pdf > > > > Jeff Schimpff > > Bureau of Science Services > > Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources > > "Bus, Bike, Walk or Carpool to Work for Clean Air for Kids" > > (*) phone: (608) 267- 7853 > > (*) fax: (608) 267-5231 > > (*) e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On > > Behalf Of Eric Westhagen > > Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2007 3:46 PM > > To: BikiesSubmissions > > Subject: [Bikies] Vagueness in Richard Schwinn's Statement > > > > Dear Richard, > > > > I am not clear as to what you have said in this paragraph. In your > > earlier paragraph you say that you "personally" agree with coercive > land > > planning, called SMART GROWTH in this context. But then you say: . . > > .---- > > > > <"While I have no reason to believe that anyone was trying to mislead > > the board with this statement, there was also no specific approval of > > it, either. Eliminating this reference doesn't mean the Bike Fed or > the > > Board rejects Smart Growth or other causes. It means the organization > > can focus more on bicycles."> > > > > It would seem to me that an organization should "officially" act > > according to their "policy or platform" as determined by their board. > > Particularly this should be the case when an advocacy organization > > seeks "publicly financed money, either in grants or contracts." But > > this is only honesty with paying members as well. If the policy then > > includes------"coersive land reform" as well as direct bicycle issues, > > then potential members would weigh the conflicts with their own > > "values." But if the group intends to advocate with full scale > lobbying > > or "official" letters of support for "emissions controls, anti-war, > > political parties, land reforms, collectivist housing, re-establishing > > mandatory zoning for or against auto parking, etc., > etc.,"----------THEN > > IT SHOULD BE STATED DIRECTLY IN POLICY STATEMENTS FOR MEMBERS AND > OTHER > > "FUNDERS." THAT IS BASIC HONESTY. Certainly we all deplore dishonest > > lobbies, which abound, when they do not agree with use, therefore such > > practices should not be suggested or condoned with BFW. > > > > Eric Westhagen > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Bikies mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://www.danenet.org/mailman/listinfo/bikies > > _______________________________________________ > Bikies mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.danenet.org/mailman/listinfo/bikies _______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list [email protected] http://www.danenet.org/mailman/listinfo/bikies
