[Winona Online Democracy] Eric:
I appreciate that you don't have an interest in debating how to debate. I suspect that only a few people will gather to develop any additions or revisions of the WOD guidelines or rules in order to improve the clarity for when and how the facilitator interevenes in the discussion. I only hope that my actions over the past few days will demonstrate to WOD members that I am attempting to address issues of civility within the framework of our current rules as stated on the website within our current structure. I suspect that the steering committee (by the way anyone is welcome to participate in this body) will be looking at this issue much more closely in the coming months--I certainly need it to be on the agenda to assist me in this role!!! I, too, hope that WOD will achieve the goal of civil discourse and not become a surrogate for newspaper opinions. On this we agree! I hope, too, that you and all of the WOD members out there will be patient and assist with your knowledge and insights as this bunch of volunteers struggles to create this vision. Kathy Seifert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eric Sorensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Kathy Seifert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 11:52 AM Subject: RE: [Winona] Fw: Opinions expressed on the Annexation inregardKathySieferts proposed question [Winona Online Democracy] Kathy: My intention has always been to participate in constructive conversations, devoid of accusations directed at individuals. I responded as I did to Turek's e-mail because her accusations were way "over the top." It is not a matter of "making peace and moving forward' as you suggest Kathy. It is simply a matter of whether or not basic rules will be adherred to regarding civil discourse. I personally do not have time to forever debate how to debate, as opposed to truly talking about the respective issues on WOD. My hope is that WOD becomes more than simply a surrogate for newspaper opinions. Eric -----Original Message----- From: Kathy Seifert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 10:38 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Winona] Fw: Opinions expressed on the Annexation in regardKathySieferts proposed question Just to clarify, I in no way mean to imlpy that members should not have emotions or express emotions in postings. I am reminded of the following quote by Aristotle: Anybody can become angry, that is easy; but to be angry with the right person, and to the right degree, and at the right time, and for the right purpose, and in the right way, that is not within everybody's power, that is not easy. I think that it gets to the crux of the troubles we seem to be experiencing as we try to discuss and I try to facilitate discussion of this highly emotionally charged subject. There is a big difference between stating that one is angry (or worried or suspicious) about the prospect of having one's property annexed by the city. It is quite another when one's anger or suspicians lead to name-calling. This is what I see happened between Ms Turek and Mr. Sorenson. Ms Turek has apologized for her actions and seems to be committed to self-monitoring in order to improve future communications about the issue. Mr. Sorenson has not communicated to the list his intentions, but I encourage him to also make peace and move forward with the discussion. Kathy Seifert ----- Original Message ----- From: Janice Turek <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2004 5:41 PM Subject: [Winona] Fw: Opinions expressed on the Annexation in regard KathySieferts proposed question [Winona Online Democracy] _____ ----- Original Message ----- From: Janice Turek <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2004 3:38 PM Subject: Fw: Opinions expressed on the Annexation in regard Kathy Sieferts proposed question ----- Original Message ----- From: Janice Turek <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 _____ _______________________________________________ This message was posted to Winona Online Democracy All messages must be signed by the senders actual name. No commercial solicitations are allowed on this list. To manage your subscription or view the message archives, please visit http://mapnp.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/winona Any problems or suggestions can be directed to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] If you want help on how to contact elected officials, go to the Contact page at http://www.winonaonlinedemocracy.org _______________________________________________ This message was posted to Winona Online Democracy All messages must be signed by the senders actual name. No commercial solicitations are allowed on this list. To manage your subscription or view the message archives, please visit http://mapnp.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/winona Any problems or suggestions can be directed to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] If you want help on how to contact elected officials, go to the Contact page at http://www.winonaonlinedemocracy.org _______________________________________________ This message was posted to Winona Online Democracy All messages must be signed by the senders actual name. No commercial solicitations are allowed on this list. To manage your subscription or view the message archives, please visit http://mapnp.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/winona Any problems or suggestions can be directed to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] If you want help on how to contact elected officials, go to the Contact page at http://www.winonaonlinedemocracy.org
