In response to a comment on Council Bill 2008-058

I decided to post this response to Jason's question on my last post about the City's Green Building policy resolution, Council Bill 2008-058, as an entry rather than in the comment section. Mainly, I just felt it was too long and covered too much territory to post in the comment section.

It is personal toward Jason because it is in response to his comment on concerns I raised about the Green Building Policy. He asked:

"Well, a question...if they (Council) had just done it and citizens found out later about the green building standard and perhaps higher construction costs...would we have a whole host of blog entries/talk radio show rants/talk radio phone calls/letters to the editor from all around the Ozarks about it being "done in secret"?

At least they're being open about it."

My response:

Jason, certainly the City Council makes requests of staff all the time. When they, as a whole, make requests of staff it is usually done in an open forum, at least that's what the Sunshine Law requires and we assume it is so unless they cite state law which makes it legal for Council to meet in closed session. Generally, when the public perceives they haven't had an opportunity to weigh in on an issue it's because they weren't paying attention and LOST their opportunity, not that there wasn't an opportunity in the first place.

Then, that scenario brings rise to what I think is the deeper question.

Look at the Storage Container issue for an example, and honestly I haven't had a chance to look over the proposed ordinance closely yet, but I did attend the last storage container meeting before they drafted it. At that meeting the owner of "Pods" was there and he was concerned about the signage being restricted to 12" x 12" for very legitimate reasons. His signage is larger and it is EMBEDDED into the pods but the limitations of signage wasn't changed when the draft was released. So sometimes, it seems that regardless of public input and how legitimate it is the City makes decisions, after celebrating a whole host of public input sessions, that appear to disregard legitimate issues. It makes it appear to be almost a bait and switch, the City has public input, is able to pat themselves on the back for providing ample opportunity for it and then, BAM! The City disregards it and does what they want anyway.

Offering an opportunity for public input isn't enough. There has to be a genuine want to listen, consider and make changes that legitimately rise out of those input sessions.

Look at Park Central Square, lots of opportunity for public input but no real consideration of the fact that it is a Halprin design. Should it have been a part of the process for the City to acknowledge and educate the public about the renowned landscape architect who designed it? Well, I think so, because clearly, now we may have a legal problem brewing because the public didn't realize the value of a Halprin design until it was, in the City's mind, too late to incorporate it and stay within the timeline of the Heer's development agreement. That was poor planning, in my opinion. Now, it seems to be a ticking time bomb, an unnecessary ticking time bomb that if handled correctly from the beginning could likely have been defused months ago, when there was time to handle it. To further complicate things, Councilman Chiles, on the Vincent David Jericho program said he DID raise that question at one of the first public input meetings. Tim Rosenbury later told me that if he'd considered Halprin's design earlier, right after Ruth Kelley's letter hit the News-Leader, the consideration wouldn't have effected the timeline.

The question in this posting is, and was in the previous posting I made about the Green Building Policy: Is it necessary to pass a resolution in order to build green? The city's attorney said no, it isn't. I question taxpayer money and resources being spent unnecessarily for really, no other reason than to make a statement about "being a leader in sustainability." There's nothing wrong with being a leader in sustainability but taxpayer MONEY could have been "sustained" without passing an unnecessary resolution meant to do nothing but make a statement.

Your question about, "if they had just done it and citizens found out later about the green building standard and perhaps higher construction costs...would we have a whole host of blog entries/talk radio show rants/talk radio phone calls/letters to the editor from all around the Ozarks about it being "done in secret"? With the addition of your statement: "At least they're being open about it." Do you mean to imply they've done something special by being open about it? There shouldn't be anything "special" about the Council doing something in the open. Under the Sunshine Law they are very limited in what they can do "in secret." Certainly, when the City does a good job they should be commended however, the openness of government, by law a requirement, should not be viewed as something "special".

It is a welcome thing to ask for public input and a good START, but then, when looking back over the process later, after all is said and done, the real proof in the pudding is whether the City Council holds the staff and contracted employees accountable for actually considering that input, all of it, not just the part that supports what they want to accomplish. There's where public input counts. It isn't in the opportunity to have it, it isn't in the opportunity the City then has to hear it, it is in the opportunity the city has to utilize it when it is legitimate. The Council is supposed to be representative of the people who voted them into their positions

I've heard Mayor Pro Tem Deaver on more than one occasion say, "We can't please everyone" and that's true. They'll never please everyone BUT, that said, I don't recall ANY member of the public making a statement that they think Council's actions SHOULD please everyone. That makes that statement a straw man argument, because no one has ever indicated the people expect the Council to please everyone. So, why bring that up? Is that an appeasment meant to excuse the Council for making decisions that don't consider legitimate complaints from the public they are supposed to represent?

I suspect your question wasn't raised to be answered, it was raised to make a statement but if asked in question form you are protected from being questioned about your assumption. The fact is, we don't and can't know the answer to your question. This is why I suspect it was raised to raise suspicion about someone who expressed a legitimate concern about the Green Building Policy. That's my take on it because it certainly didn't address my concern about the policy or anything I actually wrote. What does your question have to do with my concern about the unnecessary and perhaps untimely taxpayer money and resources spent to bring this bill to Council?

Council Bill 2008-058

The City's Green Building Policy

Here's a portion of the bill, you can read the whole bill by clicking on the hot link "Bill 2008-058," here:

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD, MISSOURI, as follows:

Section 1 - Green building design, construction, and operation furthers the goals set forth in the Springfield-Greene County Vision 20/20 Comprehensive Plan.

Section 2 - The City Council hereby adopts the "City of Springfield Green Building Policy." This policy reflects the City's commitment to encourage environmentally sensitive construction practices in the City of Springfield by utilizing, for City-owned buildings, construction practices that meet the prerequisites and performance benchmarks of the U.S. Green Building Council's Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certification process.

Section 3 - The City Council hereby declares that all new City-owned buildings, of any size, intended for human occupation, shall be designed, contracted, and built to LEED Silver Certification for New Construction (LEED-NC), and shall strive to achieve higher certification levels (Gold or Platinum) whenever project resources and conditions permit. Regardless of the level of certification, the project shall include at a minimum: seven (7) of the total LEED points achieved shall be for energy performance; two (2) of the total LEED points achieved shall be for water use reduction; and one (1) of the total LEED points achieved shall be for construction waste management. All projects shall develop and implement a Measurement & Verification Plan consistent with EA CRedit 5, which will result in an additional point for energy efficiency. All new City buildings not intended for human occupation shall be designed, contracted, and built to include as many prerequisites and performance benchmarks of the LEED-NC program as possible. Buildings not intended for human occupation include utility, material, and equipments storage type structures, structures where occupancy is typically intermittent, or structures not designed to have heating and/or air conditioning equipment installed, i.e. open sided structures.

Section 4 - The City Council hereby declares that all future renovations of City buildings shall be designed, contracted, and built to include as many prerequisites and performance benchmarks of the LEED for Existing Buildings (LEED-EB) program as possible. If a building renovation involves replacement of appliances, heating and/or air conditioning equipment, or other systems that use energy, the new equipment shall be Energy Star qualified, if qualified equipment is available.

Section 5 - The City Council, to maintain tight control over the cost of City building projects, qualifies the above Section 3 of this Green Building Policy to require the total LEED project life cycle cost analysis demonstrate an operational cost savings payback within ten (10) years for any premium above the industry standard. Where the operational cost savings payback is anticipated to be more than ten (10) years, the City Manager is directed to approve the level of LEED certification appropriate for that particular project. If no level of LEED certification is feasible, the project under consideration shall include as many prerequisites and performance benchmarks of the LEED program that are feasible and at a minimum all equipment installed in the building shall be Energy Star qualified, if qualified equipment is available.

Section 6 - The City Council may grant exceptions to this Policy when it deems appropriate.

Section 7 - The City Council directs the City Manager to perform a review of this policy within two (2) years after the policy is adopted and to provide a report to the City Council's Community Involvement Committee regarding any recommended changes to the policy.

I didn't like this bill when it first came out because I saw it as a waste of taxpayer money. Citizens spent a lot of valuable time in public input processes and the city spent a lot of money in time and resources bringing this bill before Council (I think at Council's request) to make the statement: "Look at what the city is doing! We're building green! Follow our lead!" When all they really had to do was request City staff to build city buildings green and they'd do it. I'm not making that up. Dan Wichmer, the City Attorney told me that. It wasn't necessary to generate a bill/resolution to build green. If they wanted attention they could have just built green and at the ribbon cutting announced they'd had the building built to LEED Silver Certification standards and that they plan to continue and would encourage the community and other businesses to do the same.

But, now they've done it. They spent taxpayer time and resources to bring us this lovely resolution on a green building policy. They tabled the first one, went back to the drawing board, spent time rewriting and now we have the new draft. At this point it would be a bigger waste of taxpayer money not to pass it after spending all the time they have on it than to go ahead and pass it.

There might be one other consideration. It will likely cost more money to build green initially but the idea is that in the long run our government will save money over the life of the building by building green. That's a fact and I embrace that fact. I do wonder, at a time when we are facing a budget crises and need to be finding ways to fund the police/fire pension plan, if this was the best timing to promote another goal "set forth in the Springfield-Greene County Vision 20/20 Comprehensive Plan" that initially costs more money to implement even though I recognize its money saving future.

A person would be a fool to argue against the objectives of building green. They are great objectives. But a person should, in my opinion, weigh the timing of such policies and the necessity of them before spending the taxpayers' money through cost and administrative resources.

For more information about LEED Certification: USGBC: LEED

Urinary tract infections in the elderly

They can literally drive them crazy

Did you know: In the elderly, mental changes or confusion often are the only signs of a urinary tract infection and possible spread to the blood should be considered?

Look, having witnessed this first hand on more than one occasion but most recently with really serious mental change occuring in my Mother I just felt it was an issue that needs more attention.

If you are a caretaker of an elderly parent, or any other elderly family member for that matter, and you see subtle signs of confusion about little things or maybe your loved one has a bit of trouble saying their words, mixing them up so they don't make much sense, this could be the first sign of a urinary tract infection and if untreated it could get very serious.

Pay attention to little things. I know my Mom has a pretty sharp mind, as a general rule, and I can usually see a urinary tract infection coming but in this last case she was already on antibiotics for it and we didn't realize they weren't really working. She got more and more mentally unbalanced until, finally, she had to go to the E.R. and get a strong dose of IV antibiotics. It was really pretty scary. She is recovering now and back to her old sweet self.

If your normally alert, elderly loved one starts talking kinda whacky and seems confused about little things, don't jump to the conclusion that it's just old age or they're getting alzheimer's or going senile, it could be that they have a urinary tract infection and just need antibiotics to clear it up. Take 'em to the doctor and get 'em checked out.

I get a lot of hits on elderly care. Isn't that interesting? I don't know why I found that surprising, it's a part and cycle of life and all of us caring for elderly parents could probably share some of our experiences with each other and save each other a lot of problems.

Mom just needs to put on a lot of weight now and get stronger. She and I could always use your prayers, 6 or 8 times a day, that's all we ask. ;)

Opportunity for public comment

for what it's worth

The Ozarks Transportation Organization is inviting public comment regarding "amendments to the 2008-2011 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP)."

Among the amendments:

"The City of Springfield is requesting TIP amendments for enhancement projects. The City of Springfield was awarded enhancement funds for the Jordan Valley Car Park and is now requesting to re-appropriate those funds to other enhancement projects in the City of Springfield."

For more information:

"The amendments will be available for review at Ozarks Transportation Organization, 840 Boonville Ave., 3rd Floor. Comments may be submitted* in writing to the Ozarks Transportation Organization, PO Box 8368, 840 Boonville, Springfield, MO 65801 or e-mail to sedwards@ozarkstransportation.org or fax to (417) 864-1881."

The comment period began yesterday, February 19 and continues through Thursday the 28th.

More from the news release:

"The MPO Board of Directors will review and possibly approve the amendments at its February 28, 2008 meeting to be held from noon to 1 p.m. in the fourth floor conference room of the Busch Municipal Building, 840 Boonville Ave. An opportunity for public comment will be available at this meeting*. After reviewing recommendations and public comment, the MPO Board of Directors will decide whether to formally adopt the amendments."

So, for what it's worth, you can weigh in on the city's amendments. There's no guarantee of how seriously your comments will be taken but if you want to weigh in, now's the time to do it and if you don't, well, it's sorta like if you don't vote in an election, your right to complain doesn't go away but you probably ought to do more than that. Decisions aren't made in a vacuum, they don't just happen.

And, by the way, did you know anyone can sign up for news releases from the City? Just go here, look at the bottom of the yellow box on the right hand side of the web page, at the bottom of the yellow box is a link to subscribe via email to news releases from the city.

And, for the record, I'm not necessarily suggesting there is anything wrong with the city wanting "to re-appropriate those funds to other enhancement projects in the City of Springfield" by singling that amendment out but people wonder how these things happen. This is one of the ways these things happen.

*emphasis mine

"Way too much divisiveness"

Tony Messenger at "My Obama moment" said:

"There's way too much divisiveness in our political discussion these days."

Gee, I wonder if it's coming "From the Right" or "From the Left?" Maybe "Ozarks Right" or "Ozarks Left" can tell us.

(snicker)

Park Central Square

We haven't heard the last of it.

After the Council luncheon today I mentioned to Councilman Chiles that I was sorry I didn't get to speak to him about the Park Central Square issue as it relates to Lawrence Halprin's design (he didn't return my call after I tagged him the second time) and he mentioned back that we haven't heard the last of this issue. I agreed with him and here's why. I realize I'm not the one to break this news, I got the link to this updated version from an online letter at the News-Leader, though I had knowledge of their involvement before the Special Council meeting called February 12.

The Cultural Landscape Foundation is suggesting that you can help by sending a letter requesting full consideration of the Lawrence Halprin design to:

The Springfield City Council

Springfield Landmarks Board

Missouri Alliance for Historic Preservation

The Springfield News-Leader print editor

The Springfield News-Leader on-line editor

Missouri State Historic Preservation Office

This ain't no novel

People are jaded. People are jaded by thoughts they've formed without all the information they needed to form them. That's one thing I have learned since starting to write for Community Free Press - Midweek, and believe me, I've learned a lot (thanks, Mert).

There are a lot of things I thought I knew that I didn't know at all, but let me explain something else, too. People can also be jaded by talking to the very people they report on, or maybe jaded isn't the right word, more like impressed, swayed, biased or shmoozed, something like that. At least I am susceptible to being schmoozed because I really want to like people and I suspect a lot of reporters grapple with that issue every day.

I heard somebody on the Vincent David Jericho program on KSGF this morning make the statement that we should be suspicious of government but not cynical, that becoming cynical can do more harm than good (or something like that). I think that deserves a bit of thought. Suspicion is the:

1. act of suspecting; imagination of the existence of guilt, fault, falsity, defect, or the like, on slight evidence or without evidence. Source: my American College Dictionary, Random House - New York, copyright, 1947.

To be a cynic is to be:

1. a sneering faultfinder; one who doubts or denies the goodness of human motives, and who often displays his attitude by sneers, sarcasm, etc. Source: same as above (I love my old dusty dictionary).

I think being suspicious might be suspecting someone but being willing to accept the facts if they don't line up with one's suspicions. Being a cynic, I think, might be an unwillingness to accept the facts at all if they don't support what one wants to believe, which, apparently, is always the worst. I surely wouldn't want to develop the nasty habit of being a cynic. A cynic doesn't seem like a very attractive thing to be.

The fact is: I like people and I like to think the best of them. I like to think that people can disagree and people can do ill advised things for honorable reasons or, if the things they do are simply inexcusable, out of ignorance and that when they know better they'll want to do the right thing, but, in all honesty, that isn't always the case. Sometimes people choose not to do the right thing for less than honorable reasons. I could give some examples where I suspect that has happened in this very city with people in high positions but I'd prefer to just enjoy this little exercise in a more general sense and save the rest of it for sometime when I have real facts instead of suspicions.

So, now you think about it. Do you have a suspicious mind or are you a cynic? I wouldn't wish being a cynic on anyone, that seems like it would be a very unhappy attitude.

I think we should probably all give each other a chance until we can prove our suspicions are more than just suspicions.

...and sorry, maybe this was boring. I was just thinkin' and didn't want anyone to get the impression I was working on my next novel. ;)

Boo!

...I hope I didn't scare you!

I'll be back soon. I'm writing something for money right now. ;)

Council Bill 2008-052, Park Central Square Renovation

It's 1:07 p.m. and citizens interested in the bill which Council will vote on at 11:30 tomorrow morning is still not available online. The bill authorizes city staff to adopt the design proposal of Butler Rosenbury & Partners, Inc. for the downtown (Park Central) square.

I have a copy of the bill in my possession, my thanks to Mike Brothers of the city's Public Information Office for spending a great deal of time on my behalf getting this information to me.

Brothers wrote in an email response that they will be voting on the resolution on Tuesday, February 12. Brothers indicated that because it is a resolution it only requires one reading and the Council can vote on it. He wrote, "The Council could decide to hold it over, but that doesn't often happen with a resolution."

Here is what he gave as the reason for it being held in a Tuesday vote rather on the Monday night agenda:

"The reason it was called for Tuesday instead of Monday was to make sure we would be able to meet the 24-hour posting notice per the sunshine law, which would be 11:30 a.m. today, in case it wasn't completed by end of the day Friday."

Since it is (or was) still unavailable online (at the time of this writing), here is the pertinent information on the bill, transcribed from the document Brothers sent me this morning, some of the layout varies but the words are directly from the bill:

Sponsored by: Deaver

Substitute No. 1
COUNCIL BILL NO. 2008-052 RESOLUTION NO.

A RESOLUTION

AUTHORIZING city staff to adopt the design proposal of Butler Rosenbury & Partners, Inc. for the downtown square.

____________________________________________

WHEREAS, the City of Springfield has determined that the downtown square is a functionally obsolete public asset, last renovated 38 years ago; and

WHEREAS, for the last year, the City, the Urban Districts Alliance and a committee comprised of members of the community conducted numerous public meetings to seek input from members of the general public regarding design alternatives for the downtown square; and,

WHEREAS, over 750 people offered input to assist in designing alternatives for the downtown square; and,

WHEREAS, Butler Rosenbury & Partners, Inc. designed three variations for the redesign of the downtown square; and,

WHEREAS, the City Council, in an effort to comply with time frames set forth in the redevelopment agreement with Kevin McGowan for the redevelopment of the Heer's Building has determined that design alternatives proposed by Butler Rosenbury & Partners, Inc. have sufficiently encompassed the concerns and proposals offered by the citizens of the City of Springfield and are ready to proceed with the design and construction of the downtown improvements; and

WHEREAS, the City has obtained federal funding for the design and implementation of Phase 1 for the redevelopment of the downtown square; and

WHEREAS, Urban Districts Alliance, the City, and the business community are working in a joint effort to raise funds to assist in implementing the remaining phases of the square.*

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD as follows, that:

Section 1 - The recommended design of Butler Rosenbury & Partners, Inc., as presented to the Springfield City Council on February 5, 2008,* is hereby accepted by the City Council of the City of Springfield as the proposed design for improvements to the downtown square.

Section 2 - City Council hereby directs staff to take any and all steps necessary to prepare plans, documents, and drawings and to proceed with the design set forth above. The City Manager is further authorized to enter into agreements necessary to effectuate the terms of this resolution.

Section 3 - This resolution shall be effective immediately upon adoption.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

SUBSTITUTE #1: EXPLANATION TO COUNCIL BILL NO. 2008-052

ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: City Manager

PURPOSE:

To adopt the design proposal of Butler Rosenbury & Partners, Inc for development of the downtown square and to permit the City Manager to enter into agreements to meet the terms of the resolution.

BACKGROUND:

The City of Springfield received a federal grant to assist in the renovation of Park Central Square. After an extensive public input process, Butler Rosenbury & Partners presented alternative designs to City Council on February 5, 2008.

REMARKS:

This resolution adopts the recommended alternative design presented February 5, 2008, directs staff to proceed with construction plans, and authorizes the City Manager to take all actions necessary to implement the preferred design.

Submitted and approved by:
Bob Cumley
City Manager

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Mike Brothers, Special Projects Coordinator, City of Springfield wrote:

"The public will be able to comment on Tuesday."

If you would like to comment tomorrow, Tuesday, February 12, 2008, the meeting will be conveniently held in City Council Chambers at 11:30 a.m.

*Emphasis mine. Butler Rosenbury & Partners, Inc., recommended the complete package offered, Phase 1, 2 and 3.

Council Bill 2008-052

Mike Brothers of City Connect posted the new events calendar for the week of February 11 - February 15:

Events Calendar Now Posted

The City's weekly events calendar is now posted. Some of the highlights include Monday's City Council meeting and a special City Council meeting at 11:30 a.m. Tuesday. The special council meeting is being called to vote on a proposed resolution concerning the redesign concepts for Park Central Square. Immediately following the special meeting, Council will have its regular weekly lunch session in the Busch Building fourth floor conference room.

Since the council bill (2008-052) is not listed on the Upcoming Council Meeting Agenda, I can only assume it is going to be added to the agenda Monday night because I don't believe the Council can vote, as Brothers writes they will do at the Special Council meeting on Tuesday, without having a first reading of the bill and giving the public an opportunity to speak on the bill.

Trouble is, if you follow Brother's link in his posting "Weekly Events Calendar" and click on the link, "Special City Council Meeting," the link to the bill is not a hot link, meaning citizens cannot access the bill and read it prior to the Monday night City Council meeting where it is not listed on the agenda.

How can citizens properly weigh in on the issue when it is not listed as part of the Monday night agenda, cannot be accessed for reading online and then will be voted on at a special 11:30 a.m. meeting the next day?

I've had to make some assumptions based on past experience and the information available to me tonight. It's Saturday, so the City offices are not open for questions. If I am incorrect in my assumptions, perhaps Louise Whall, if she happens by the blog will correct me.

Oops, I made a mistake on the independent auditor blog post below

Springfield Public Information Director Louise Whall sent me an email today to scold me about my last posting regarding Bill 2008-045 (I have removed the preceding post on Bill 2008-045 after allowing adequate time for readers to view it. I did this because the information was incorrect but I am leaving this post addressing it so as not to appear to be hiding a mistake. I simply see no reason to keep a post available that is incorrect). Seems I completely misinterpreted the salary that would be paid to the independent auditor.

Ms. Whall wrote:

"I would urge you to please correct your blog post. It would have been prudent to investigate this before you go posting completely inaccurate information."

I thought I had. I missed some important information because I focused more on the introduction to the bill, the job description, functions and qualifications, which I carefully read. And I focused on comparing what other City employees earn that are comparable in salary, but I blew through the part about the budget adjustment. The adjustment of $21,563 is an appropriation reserved to pay for the last quarter of the 2007/2008 budget year and had I read it closer I might have realized that.

My apologies for the misunderstanding. I'd like to say I'll never make a mistake again but, knowing myself like I do I think I know better than to say such a foolish thing.

At any rate, it's nice to know the City is watching me as closely as I am watching them.

Thanks for teaching me a lesson, Ms. Whall. It's always good to be reminded that we must look at ALL the fine print and not just a part of it.

Recommended Reading 5

Landslide: Park Central Square, Springfield, MO/ The Cultural Landscape Foundation

On December 15, 2007, Mrs. Ruth Kelley, a long-time property and business owner in downtown Springfield, Missouri, wrote a letter which appeared in the local newspaper, the New Leader. In that communication, she asked the city council to reconsider the proposed reconfiguration of the Park Central Square, in downtown Springfield....

We were intrigued with this undocumented early public project by Halprin – a design that does not appear in any of the early surveys (e.g. Process Architecture No. 4: Lawrence Halprin, 1978.) ....

You can read Ruth Kelley's comments at the link.

Here is what Lawrence Halprin had to say about Park Central Square:

"This work came after the firm was already consulting in Missouri (referencing the Civic Center Master Plan for Kansas City of 1966). The design for Springfield came about as shopping malls such as Nicollet Mall in Minneapolis, MN, were gaining popularity. These public spaces were also becoming cultural centers, with art becoming widely incorporated. The fountain at Springfield was meant to present abstraction and it had a lot to do with design. Architect Charles Moore [who had worked with Halprin on Lovejoy just a few years earlier with Moore & Turnbull as associated architects] likely influenced the Pavilion design, including its clipped corners."

For a look at some other threatened designs of Halprin:

LANDSLIDE /Three Invisible Modernist Designs by Lawrence Halprin

These landscapes suffer from poor maintenance that has led to demolition/redesign proposals at these sites.

Recommended Reading 4

There's a first time for everything.

I don't think I've ever recommended an Our Voice column from the News-Leader before, here are some excerpts:

"Today, the polls mean nothing....

Today is Super Tuesday. Missouri is among 22 states choosing nominees for president in Democratic and Republican primaries. If we believe the most recent pollsters, this is a state in which the Democrats are leaning to Obama and the Republicans are leaning toward John McCain over other GOP candidates Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney and Ron Paul.

But today, those polls mean nothing....

Today's is an important primary. It's a primary in which each party is redefining itself, state by state, vote by vote.

It's a primary in which voters, just by turning out, can send a message to politicians that we're paying attention and they better address the issues that matter to us.

It's a primary in which every vote counts.

So, ignore the polls, we say. Maybe they're right. Maybe they're not. Only you, the voter, can decide that.

Go to your polling place and make a difference today."

To the Romney Campaign representative who just called me...

I should have cleared this up for you while you were on the phone but I didn't.

You said, "A vote for Mike Huckabee is a vote for John McCain."

Sorry. I disagree. A vote for Mike Huckabee is a vote for Mike Huckabee. Thanks, anyway.

I am an undecided independent at the moment but even if I knew who I was going to vote for today I wouldn't tell this blog audience.

So, there :P