----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2004 3:38 PM
Subject: Fw: Opinions expressed on the Annexation in regard Kathy
Sieferts proposed question
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2004 3:35 PM
Subject: Fw: Opinions expressed on the Annexation in regard Kathy
Sieferts proposed question
I appreciate Kathy Sieferts input and "opinion" on
how people express themselves and the importance of not directly attacking
anyone in a forum like this. I apologize for using "land grabbers" and
"power hungry" as terms to discribe those I disagree with and do not share the
same opinion on annexation. I believe opinions often need to be
expressed with emotion. I can understand taking the name calling out of a
discussion, but to take the emotion which is often linked to behavior, out of a
discussion deletes the passion and commitment one may feel to a subject.
It limits _expression_. Only stating "facts" and not allowing or respecting
opinions, closes communication
In response to Mr. Sorenson's response, I will try
to keep the emotion out of this.
1. I have changed my email address to my home
email address. I realize putting Winona Health on a personal message is
not an appropriate thing to do. I do believe the intelligent readers in
this forum realize these are my opinions and not that of Winona Health.
Since I am at work far more than I am at home, it is more convienent for
me to follow discussions not only on this but on other issues. It may be
days before I view my home email. Also, I have to believe that everyone of
us have used our work emails for our own personal stuff at one time or
another. What surprised me most on Mr. Sorenson's response to this, was
that he cc'd it to the CEO of Winona Health. Interesting.
2. Mr. Sorenson claims I am not an expert in
the mapping of proposed annex areas. I never claimed to be an expert on
mapping of proposed annexed areas, I only brought up the FACT that the County
report in Plan A sees the developable land as 40 acres verses 125 acres that the
city proposes. I realize that ciites "annex" not
counties, that is why my questions have been directed toward the actions of the
city not the county. I am not sure where Mr. Sorenson was going with
this. I just stated a "fact" that the county has a different "opinion" of
what should be developed. It did not surprise me that the city does not
agree with this report.
3. see number 2
4. Jerry Miller owning land 2 miles outside
the requested annexation is a fact. If the Phillips property is annexed,
Jerry Miller can at that point request to have pipes run out to his land, this
is a fact not an opinion. This fact has been used as an argument from the city
as to the Jason Phillips property. I have heard at numerous meetings
that land adjacent up to 2 miles outside the city limits can be favored for
annexation if deemed necessary. I heard this fact from the city
meetings. I am only basing my "opinion" on the facts that were fed to
me. I would be the first to admit that my link to my own personal
property and home, weigh my "opinions" heavily, Could anyone
say differently?. Do we not all possess the need to take care of
what is ours, including home, family and finances.
5. Mr. Sorenson says my comments are
self-serving. Of course my comments are self-serving. I wouldn't be
in this fight if they were not. However, I believe Mr Sorenson, may be
reading my passion and discussion on this entirely wrong. If you go back
on my discussions of this subject at any point, I have not said "No" to
development. I have talked about orderly, planned and sensible development
and my desire to have the city prove this is necessary in an area nearly 2 miles
out of the city limits.
6. IMr. Sorenson claims I am unaware of the
negotiations and information between Phillips and the Township. I am very
aware of the negotiations and information the Township offers as well as the
alternatives for development. I talk to Mr. Kirschman on a regular basis
(sometimes daily). I am in regular contact with the other township board
members. I have attended every Township meeting since this issue came
up. So for Mr. Sorenson to say I am uninformed that is his
"opinion". I do not claim to have privvy to all the Township information,
but I believe our Township Board has been direct and honest with the information
available to the 1200 people in Wilson Township.
I did attend the nearly 3 hour presentation
by the State representatives on alternative Septic systems. I listened and
took notes. There was not one city representative at this
presentation. If you look back the day before the presentation, I
personally invited everyone involved on the winona online demacracy site to
attend this presentation. I try to keep myself informed on any information
that is offered to me.
So again for Mr. Sorenson to say I am basically in
the dark on these subjects is once again his god-given right being born in the
US to have an "opinion".
7. Mr Sorenson made claims that I am
uninformed about the a Phillips and city agreement. I am as aware of
this agreement as been made public on the subjects. I have attended
the Board meetings regarding the Phillips propery as well at the City Meeting
that was called. I will admit I do not know the full extend of the cities
agreement with Phillips, nor does this matter. The points that Mr.
Sorenson makes here were never an issue nor have I ever brought these
up.
I am not sure where he was going with
this. If Mr. Sorenson is trying to make the point that the City and Mr.
Phillips are trying to "please" the residents of Spring Brook. This
was never an issue with me. The issue remains: "show me the need, show me
the plan, show me the city is in need to continue to annex our rural areas
and deplete us of our Townships. Show me that this a worthwhile and
responsible spending of tax dollars". I am asking for facts on this, not
opinions and speculations. However, I remain open to others opinions and
speculations, as it certainly raises things to think about.
Wilson Township also has asked for hard facts
supporting their decisions. Wilson Township has been willing to start
developing a orderly plan of annexation, but being the responsible people they
are, they want to get it right and do the right thing. In order to do that
they need information from the city. Unfortunately at the Township meeting
last night they were told by the city officials attending, their request for
information was not important in the decision making process and the
statistics would not be supplied to them unless it goes to a State
mediator. If it goes to the State mediator, this will be a
requirement. I am really confused as to why the State would see this as
important, but our City officials do not. Interesting. A 'fact' to
ponder.
8. Mr. Sorenson claims I do not understand
finances. I am not a financial expert, this is a fact!! (nor do
I wish to be). I only posed questions as to how the city can financially
justify this move. I implored others to talk with their councilmen on
this. My understanding is the city councilmen believe this annexation is a
"slam dunk" (actual quote (fact) by a councilmen). They believe this
because no one is calling them and questioning what they are doing or expressing
an opinion either way on the subject. I raised questions to others
on this forum to think about. How can the city justify annexing what the
county sees as only 40 buildable acres. I was fully aware the city sees it
differently. Mr. Sorenson, had the right to express his "opinion" and
offer more facts, that is what this debate is all about.
Lastly, in regards to Mr. Sorenson's comments about
acting professionally, My profession is not in city planning, I am not a
professional nor possess past experience in this area.
My comments are on a personal level. I have
never claimed otherwise. I have never said I am writing as a
professional and would hope this a very mute point on Mr. Sorenson's part.
I am a Registered Nurse and a Business women. This subject of annexation
does not touch either one of these aspects of my life, It does not affect my
profession or force me to use the information I am an expert in, it affects me
personally. My "opinion" is a personal one, not a professional one as Mr.
Sorenson eludes it needs to be.
I provide information I have gotten, but I
also express my "personal" opinion. If WOD is only a forum for
"professionalson a subject" to discuss "facts" then you might as well shut it
down. My understanding is this is a forum open to all to express opinions
and be given facts by those who may possess more or
other information. Limiting this forum to only a professional or
factual debate will not get at many core issues. It will alienate many
people who would like to debate issues because they are not "professionals" in
the area of the debate. Facts can and should be challenged on many
different levels including those who are not "professionals in the area of
discussion, this provides growth and thought.
If Mr. Sorenson, or any one else out there, did not
agree with what I was saying, or how it was being said, they had a right to
express their "opinion" and I can respect that. If they can offer facts,
then that makes it better, but facts are not necessary to carry on a debate.
Kathy Siefert did express her opinion and followed up with some
guidelines and I appreciate her "professional" manner of doing this.
Janice Turek
