I don't want to comment on Mike Kennedy's November sixth response through the use of any excerpts, until I learn whether he had given permission to post what originally was his semiprivate/direct response. I'm grateful to Mike Kennedy for his helpful information in regard to the experience of using snow retaining attachments for plows in Minneapolis. Previously, I had talked to those in Minneapolis and Hennepin County governments who were referred to me by the respective information operators and then chased down all of the subsequent referrals without learning anything beyond information about commercial contacts. I had better luck on the Internet after getting a referral that I received after talking to an official at a snow plow manufacturing plant in Little Falls, Minnesota. I have heard that there are two limitations to the Root Snow Restrictor non-plugging device at its present stage of development: - capacity is insufficient if plowing is delayed during an unusually heavy snow fall. - there may be a need for a variety of attachments in order to fit all plow blades. A representative of a road equipment dealer indicated that a difficult problem to overcome was the resistance of municipal and county governments to change. I understand that the Root Spring Scraper Company has suspended the manufacturing of the attachment because of a lack of interest. This situation might be considered analogous to the suspension of the manufacture of an early automobile because of a lack of interest in that type of product. Since I posted my November fourth message, "Plugged driveways and pedestrian intersection crossings.", I have heard a claim from a local sales representative that the City of Bismark, North Dakota uses the non-plugging type of device extensively and so "here we go again". I'll keep you all posted. Also, thanks to Mike Kennedy, we finally have some City information that we can "sink our teeth into"! As to comments about equity (see Mpls digest, Vol 1 #513 Message: 13), I see no problem. I don't want to foster a class war between the "haves" and "have nots" (Those who have alleys and those who have not.), but I believe that every taxpayer in Minneapolis pays to have alleys plowed and maintained. Only when there is a major overhaul of an alley, as with any street, is the expense paid by the adjacent property owners as an assessment. The City of Minneapolis does not plow our driveways at the expense of others. Are any changes needed? This discussion may be unnecessary anyway because the non-plugging process may also be applicable to alley driveways. I'm still involved with responding to those who have sent messages directly to me on a variety of subjects that I have addressed through Mpls. Issues, but I will want to provide at least one more message in regard to the prevention of the plugging of driveways and crosswalks. And, again, I want to express my appreciation to Mike Kennedy for his information. Neal E. Simons Prospect Park _______________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
