>>EY:  
>>Not an anonymous source -- a person who went on the record with his
>>recollection that Peter McLaughlin made this statement. 
>>
>WM: That's the problem. A journalist does not third person quote. He 
>calls the person so quoted (in this case McLaughlin) and asks him if 
>that's what he said. He doesn't just print it. McGreevy could have 
>mis-remembered what McLaughlin said. He could have attributed to 
>McLaughlin something said by another person, or he could have his own 
>agenda.
>
Point taken, Felien could have called McLaughlin for comment -- and
probably McLaughlin would not call back by press time, so the story would
be a he said, decline to comment.  

And Eddie Felien writes:  

1. If you honestly believe you didn't say anything about a flyover ramp
being in the works for 28th Street in talking to representatives of Wells
Fargo, then I must believe you.  Mr. McGreevy believes you did say something
like that.  It seems probable that there was a meeting with you and
then-Mayor Sharon Sayles-Belton and then-Council Member Brian Herron and
members of the business community last year during which you may have talked
about the flyover ramp (which had been a part of the Honeywell and
Allina-sponsored transportation study as proposed in 1998).  If you would
have acknowledged that the new tenant on the Honeywell campus, Wells Fargo,
had been informed of the flyover ramp (which, of course, they must have been
informed of the study by Honeywell as part of the purchase agreement), and
you reported this as something Wells Fargo was pleased about, then it is
possible that observers may have concluded that you had given your support
to the flyover lane, and that this was one of the sweeteners for Wells Fargo
to purchase the Honeywell properties.  This explanation would support both
you and Mr. McGreevy.  Unfortunately, Mr. McGreevy is out of town and can't
be reached today.

=====================
So does McLaughlin have a comment about this one?  

Meanwhile Lisa McDonald writes:  

During my tenure on the City Council during the very early days of this 
discussion, the common knowledge was always that the County, Mayor, Abbott 
Northwestern, Wells Fargo and the Met Council were for this fly-over because 
it would so to speak, "beam these employees into the mother ship", as 
opposed to having to drive through the neighborhood. At that time, and now, 
I was very much against the fly-over because I believe when people see the 
size of it they will have a bird. I remember Peter and I having an argument 
at a public meeting about the flyover. I indicated that I was against it. He 
not so politely indicated I should keep my opinions to myself.

=================
Lisa, thanks for posting this.  That was my understanding of this also.
Odd that Peter thinks you should keep your opinions to yourself -- but this
sounds like the type of arrogant behavior that is typical from McLaughlin
when someone disagrees with him.  

I am still waiting for Peter McLaughlin to answer Jordan Kushner's
questions.  He has posted those questions to the list twice now.  

Perhaps Peter can also clarify his position on the flyover ramp as Eddie
Felien suggests:  

2. The assumption in all this, and one which you do not contradict, is that
you support the flyover ramp.  Do you support the flyover ramp?  That is the
point!  Observers believe you do support it, because, if you didn't, the
proposal would have died years ago.  It is further assumed that you support
the proposed entrance and exit ramps at Lake Street.  It is assumed that you
support the widening of Lake Street from six to eight lanes from Blaisdell
to 5th Avenue.  What is your vision of what will happen with 35W?  We all
have a right to definite answers to these questions.

Lisa's post suggests that yes, Peter McLaughlin clearly does support a
flyover ramp.  

So my question is, why is there not the option of building ramps to and
from Lake street without a flyover ramp, and without widening Lake St?  


Eva
Eva Young
Near North
Minneapolis

"You do not have the right to never be offended. This country is based on
freedom, and that means freedom for everyone - not just you! You may leave
the room, turn the channel, express a different opinion, etc., but the
world is full of idiots, and probably always will be." --Article II of the
Bill of Non-Rights.
_______________________________________
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

Reply via email to