There was a comment on the last post claiming that the discussion of sustainability is premature. I contend that once a councilmember has made a presentation in a public meeting that the time for this argument has passed. But this does beg the question of why the silence from Councilmember Walker on the subject. The last time that any public presentation was scheduled was March 11th City Council meeting when Councilmember Walker pulled it from the agenda. Whatever the reason, it seems odd that after spending 5 months studying the subject and making 2 public presentations on it all of a sudden Elizabeth Walker does not want to discuss it any more.
Why?
Is it no longer important?
Is it just not needed in Duvall?
Is it too controversial?
Or does it just cost too much in political capital?
Was it less about "sustainability" and more about something else?
I, for one, was very interested in seeing where this discussion would lead and what ideas would come from it. I would like to hear more about this but all I hear is the deafening sound of silence.
Thomas,
ReplyDeleteCue the "they're ba-aack" line. A moment of humor. Sorry, this really isn't that funny.
Perhaps you need to find a way to post Elizabeth Walker's power point presentation which "proposes" (hence the proper use of the term "proposal") a restructuring of city staff, departments, priorities and council committees and commissions...uh, everything...in terms of sustainability.
If the entire "proposal" were posted for public viewing then "seeing would be believing" and we could stop with the equivocating already.
Posting something of this "magnitude" may be beyond the scope and capabilities of blogspot - but isn't her proposal somewhere online at the city? Where can the public see it?
Why would one hide something if they are initially so proud of it or if it is really 'that good?'
Sustainability is a good thing. But it loses its goodness when it is rammed down the throats of an unsuspecting community.
ReplyDeleteIs it being rammed down anyone's throat right now? It does not appear that way.
ReplyDeleteYes, it is being rammed through.
ReplyDeleteA council member spends months of time and research on a project, puts a proposal together, and delivers it to the council retreat. At the same retreat, the council goes against the municipal code and assigns committees, getting the 'right' people on board the economic development committee who will help ram this through.
Residents get word that the council member will present her proposal in a public meeting - they go - questions are asked which are dodged by the council member.
Residents get word (second time) that the council member will present her proposal at a council meeting - they go - council member removes her proposal from the agenda because there are people there who have questions about it.
Council member continues to contact residents to participate on elements of her proposal and shows that she intends to go ahead with her proposal.
The project is getting rammed down our throats, with zero input from members of our community who try repeatedly to engage the council member in some kind of useful discussion.
E.W. is silent because, after taking her proposal off the agenda and away from the public light, she's going door to door, asking people to support it and get on board her CAG. Well, not really going door to door - only to those friends she thinks will support her proposal.
ReplyDeleteIs this true? Councilmember Walker is putting together a CAG without this Sustainability Committee proposal thing approved by Council? She doesn't have the authority to do this, does she?
ReplyDeleteI have heard of a couple of local buisness people who have been approached by her about being part of something like this. Thanks to the First Amendment she has the ability to talk about anything she wants. That being said it seems a little disingenuous that she would start to work on these proposals without continuing the public discussion she started or getting approval of the Council.
ReplyDeleteThat is a really good question. When are we going to hear more about this proposal that was so vital for the city to take part in? I think Thomas is right. This was about something much more than sustainability.
ReplyDeleteI first took it at face value but this has caused me to re-think that assessment. The more I think about it the more I am now convinced that it is really about trying to keep political power after being mayor pro tem. One more thing to add to the the pot to consider. Remember how during the election all her political material mentioned her position as mayor pro tem and how she used that to her advantage at every opportunity? It is interesting that now that this has passed to Gary Gill she proposes an overhall of a city committee that would have sweeping effects on how the city does buisness. Just something to consider...
ReplyDeleteWhy is Elizabeth Walker so harsh (Slide 2 of her presentation) when she talks about the Future Duvall survey? A lot of people I know liked how it was in-depth and comprehensive. It was a first-rate effort by people who donated time and expertise that could have cost us a lot - didn't the park survey cost more than $15,000? What did Future Duvall cost?
ReplyDeleteThomas, thanks for putting Walker's presentation online for all of us to see. Since it was presented at a council meeting a long time ago, there's been no open / public discussion of it except on your blog. Getting to look at the document online (without being rushed through a presentation) makes it pretty clear why she has retreated from it.
ReplyDeletePlease explain.
ReplyDeleteWhy does Elizabeth Walker 1) propose something with numerous references to engaging citizens in an open discussion and then, 2) disengage completely?
There is no 'face value' on this. First off, we can't be sure what it is she is trying to do: her slide show is a series of overarching terms, generalizations, and nebulous goals and does not include the nuts and bolts of how to actually do anything with these ideas. Its shallow and not thoughtful. She also condemns what was a truly great effort, done by locals with a significant investment of their time and energy on the project (Future Duvall)...and, in the next breath, Walker offers up her "new skills and interests" at a "reasonable" cost to us.
Side note: you don't get the greatest collaboration when you're in the business of tearing down other people's work to build up your own. (I'm seeing integrity being woven back into this discussion here soon...)
In actuality, Walker's presentation is quite bold and presumptive. It assumes 1) we all want what she wants (maybe, if we could first understand what that is); 2) we all agree Future Duvall failed (no agreement there, sorry); and 3) there is no one who can do this better than her (which, might be true since none of us seem to figure out what it is she wants to do in the first place). If all of what I'm saying is starting to make sense to someone, then we have found a person who will be able to decipher Walker's proposal for us.
Interesting...sustainability as a function of government always comes down to power, uh, I mean, energy.
As far as I know there was very little cost to the city for the survey. I believe they paid a small amount for postage and a little staff time. The interesting part to this is how much cheaper the private sector can do things versus the government.
ReplyDeleteI am interested to see when she will start to talk about it publicly. Will it be in a sparsely attended council meeting and it will be slyly added to the agenda at the last minute or will it be well publicized so that the people can hear it directly from her? Will she continue to approach people quietly about it so she can get everything ready so she can try to pass it through quickly? Or perhaps it will all just quietly go away proving the point that it wasn’t really about sustainability at all but rather about adding to government, to her political resume and attempting to gather more political power.
ReplyDeleteBarry
On Slide 1 of Walker's sustainability presentation, she takes issue with every aspect of the Future Duvall survey. She says it is a poor design, too long, has no planning for results and no community involvement.
ReplyDeleteShow us how. Is there any evidence that these statements are true? No. They are simply strong (harsh) opinions from someone who doesn't particularly know much about survey design, data interpretation, vision strategy or professionalism.
Walker lacks professionalism when she rips into a project without fully understanding what the strategy, schedule, and vision are. She should be telling Think2A thanks for all their hard work and making sure the public knows she appreciates them. We're supposed to be a friendly and supportive community - that way we encourage other residents to get involved, volunteer their time and energy and resources...that way other people can see what a positive experience working on behalf of our city's residents really can be.
It's interesting that Walker's presentationn claims that sustainability doesn't demean anyone, and yet the first slide deck that she created tears the futureduvall survey a new one. It's actions like this that really frustrate me with government and make me not trust them.
ReplyDeleteIt's really not as much about whether they and I agree or disagree on what needs to happen, but rather it's more about how they disagree. Disagreeing while still having respect for the other party is perfect - disagreeing by trashing the other person is childish.
"My new skills and interest are available at a very reasonable cost." - Elizabeth Walker.
ReplyDeleteEnough said.
If you had been there you would have known she was joking. Everyone there understood that. I have read the comments above and it is sad to see that it's just another negative commentary to attack an individual.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, I have heard Council Member Walker say positive things about addressing your concerns. And I have seen her take action to be fair to all of you. Since this has become a place that has no purpose for good positive discussion I will exit now and preserve my integrity.
Enough said
Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteI was there and I did not think it was a joke. At least 3 other people who were there also thought that she was serious. (2 of which were councilmembers)Please take the time to get a copy of the recording and listen to it for yourself. I believe that would be the best way for you to understand the concern that I have about whether this is a joke or not.
I hope that Councilmember Walker starts to talk to the rest of the community as she is talking to you. I think there is a great deal of good that could come from her publicly discussing these ideas.
Rob, if you have to take a comment out of context to make your point, then you don't really have one. You're just digging for dirt that isn't there. Only fools listen to you.
ReplyDeleteIn response to the comment Anonymous made above:
ReplyDeleteIf 'preserving your integrity' depends on turning a blind eye to the truth, so be it.
Guess we'll have to miss your insightful commentary.
Oh well.
Thomas, you're absolutely right.
ReplyDeleteAs you have found a way to post Walker's power point in its entirety, is it also possible to post audio clips?
Seems like some people are having a hard time believing what's really happening in city government.
It is a sad state of affairs when the only way to get an 'honest' answer around here is to dig up the records. Who has time to read / listen to all of these proceedings on a regular basis.
Thanks for your hard work to uncover the truth.
Anonymous post at 7:39,
ReplyDeleteWhile I am sure that all those who read this blog appreciate you calling them fools. In the future this type of comment will not be published. Your first point would be taken more seriously if you did not add the last comment.
Taking comments out of context, said someone above. Hmm. Did they open the link to Walker's power point presentation?
ReplyDeleteCalling informed citizens "fools." Hmm. Sounds like 'someone' wishes the truth wouldn't come out.
Sorry, 'someone's' agenda isn't going through according to plan. At least, not as easily as 'someone' hoped.
Just recieved a comment that I will not be publishing. If Anonymous would like to edit it and sent it without the insult to the readers of the blog then I will post it.
ReplyDeleteThanks
PS
Housekeeping is a pain in the back side. Just follow the rules.