Jeffries+Reply

From: **Jeffries[|...]@aol.com** Date: **Sat, 29 Sep 2007 10:11:17 -0700** Subject: **Re: $40M Sprawl Magnet?**
 * ^  || //jeffries...@aol.com//  ||   || [|View profile] ||   ||   More options  Sep 29 2007, 1:11 pm  ||
 * ^  || //jeffries...@aol.com//  ||   || [|View profile] ||   ||   More options  Sep 29 2007, 1:11 pm  ||

Wow, if we build it they will come. Huh? I mean sure sports attracts people and people bring money, classic econ. Ok before I get too far into this, let me just get this out of the way, personally I agree the money could and should go toward health care, hurricane shelters for physically and mentally challenged, better mass transportation etc. And yes I think this would make an interesting source for tracking complex systems and our county in particular (micro). But what really fascinates me is the silencing of voices. The end of the article points out that in a previous meeting Commissioner Blair requested comments be kept to a minimum, I wonder is limiting dialogue, if dialogue can even occur in the space of a minute, really the best way to determine the priorities of a community? What do you'll think this tell us on a macro level? I mean if this were to be tracked from a systems perspective would the data represent the pulse of the community or the dream of a few rogue commissioners?