I just heard on the news that an amendment to the stadium bill called for money to implement noise insulation around the airport. I don't know who offered the amendment, but I just want to say I think it set back the cause of airport noise mitigation more than anything else I can think of.
The vast majority of people don't have any sympathy for folks living around the airport and think they should stew in their own juices. The same majority also believes the legislative process is more distasteful than watching sausage being made. Then along comes something like this - trying to meld two subjects that bear no relationship to each other - and those same people think noise activists will do anything to get their way. Their final emotion will be one of disgust and a resolve to not help on the issue at all. Folks, the arguments for noise insulation can be made on its own merits. It takes some knowledge and effort. Trying to get funding through trickery just gives government and the noise issue a bad rap. I thought there were rules in the legislature about "germane" amendments. Obviously someone was asleep at the switch when this one got through. Jan Del Calzo Lynnhurst _______________________________________ 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
