[MissoulaGov] Bicycles On the Sidewalk of course...Re: MissoulaGov Digest, Vol 44, Issue 8
Jonathan Marquis
jbmarquis at gmail.com
Thu Oct 8 13:47:55 MDT 2009
Bicycles are probably the best and most tangible method for an individual to
cut their carbon emissions, slow global warming, and decreasing dependence
on oil. So i think passing legislation that encourage people to drive their
car over biking due to feeling safe is something we should not do. We should
be finding more ways to encourage biking - which I believe the new bike
lanes around town are doing this.
I commute everyday on my bicycle from Msla's west side to work on Orange st
- west side of the road and south of the river. The recent addition of bike
lanes from the broadway to the river has made it much safer. However,
heading north on Orange at 5pm crossing broadway is dangerous because the
bike lane ends (can we get some bike lanes on that stretch too?). Trying to
be like a vehicle (which is what i think we are suppose to be doing on the
road, correct?) and merging across two lanes to make a left on to spruce
street can be very dangerous. I could make a right turn on spruce and turn
around, however it is still a busy time of day and biking anywhere at that
time can be dangerous. In addition, in this fast past society, bike riders
are busy people too and expecting them to go a mile or two out of their way
to avoid traffic is a lot to expect, not to mention pedaling takes a lot of
physical effort. So why do all this when i could just safely and slowly make
my way down the range Street's west sidewalk, yielding for pedestrians and
vehicles that have the right of way. This allows me to inititally avoid
crossing Oranges street and riding on a street that does not have a bike
lane during the busiest time of day. This makes sure cars do not have to
dodge or get stuck behind me. I do not see anything wrong with this, and
passing a law that prohibits this type of travel seems a bit overkill, when
my safety and the safety of the automobile drivers are at the forefront of
my decision. It seems detrimental to everyone to pass a law that does not
allow bikers during rush hour to make the safe & smart choice for everyone
on the streets.
Biking downtown on a congested sidewalk is a different circumstance, and
most bikers recognize this. However when i travel downtown for my morning
coffee most of the time there is no one on the sidewalks, so when i merge
off higgins onto the sidewalk to park my bike why should i get off my bike
at the curb when i could SAFELY cruise right to the bike rack? The
University had a law that said when on a sidewalk you can travel twice the
speed of pedestrians, which equates to about 5 mph, that seems to be a fair
response to traveling on sidewalks. However, taking police away from more
important matters then a cyclist on a sidewalk also seems ridiculous, and
therefore unenforcable. What about putting signs on light posts that say
something like "Slow down on sidewalk" with a picture of a biker. I am a
graphic designer I could design it for you! This would be one way to educate
people on slowing down on the sidewalk, while also not making it an illegal
activity.
Thanks to free cycles who promotes cycling and educates people in safe
methods of cycling. Thank to those who added the new bike lanes. But whats
up with those silly curbs on phillips that force bikers right into cars?
On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 12:00 PM, <missoulagov-request at cmslists.com> wrote:
> Send MissoulaGov mailing list submissions to
> missoulagov at cmslists.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://www.cmslists.com/mailman/listinfo/missoulagov
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> missoulagov-request at cmslists.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> missoulagov-owner at cmslists.com
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of MissoulaGov digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Bikes on Sidewalks (Everest Designs)
> 2. Bikes on Sidewalks (Bob Giordano)
> 3. Re: Bikes on Sidewalks (Bob Jaffe)
> 4. Re: Bikes on Sidewalks (Everest Designs)
> 5. Re: Bikes on Sidewalks (Russ Fletcher)
> 6. Re: Economy, Bikes, Sidewalks etc (Jeremy Hood)
> 7. Committee Update 10-7-09 (Bob Jaffe)
> 8. Foreclosure Information (Ruth Link)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 11:59:21 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Everest Designs <everestdesigns at yahoo.com>
> Subject: [MissoulaGov] Bikes on Sidewalks
> To: missoulagov at cmslists.com
> Message-ID: <885756.41792.qm at web52905.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Ok then we should allow all the cool progressive people who buy small
> scooters from scooterville to ride on the sidewalks too----yeah let's just
> ride r bikes any way we want with out any rules like----ya know like J
> walking which really isn't a problem but somehow I bet there is legislation
> in place?at the city level.???? Just walk your bike---whats the big deal.
> ?
> Matt
>
>
>
>
> ?
> ?
> ?
>
> ?
>
> --- On Wed, 10/7/09, missoulagov-request at cmslists.com <
> missoulagov-request at cmslists.com> wrote:
>
>
> From: missoulagov-request at cmslists.com <missoulagov-request at cmslists.com>
> Subject: MissoulaGov Digest, Vol 44, Issue 7
> To: missoulagov at cmslists.com
> Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 12:00 PM
>
>
> Send MissoulaGov mailing list submissions to
> ??? missoulagov at cmslists.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> ??? http://www.cmslists.com/mailman/listinfo/missoulagov
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> ??? missoulagov-request at cmslists.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> ??? missoulagov-owner at cmslists.com
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of MissoulaGov digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> ???1. Re: Committee Update 9-30-09 Bikes on Sidewalks (amy casamassa)
> ???2. Re: Committee Update 9-30-09 Bikes on Sidewalks (Ethel MacDonald)
> ???3. Re: Committee Update 9-30-09 Bikes on Sidewalks (David V. Gray)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 13:29:51 -0600
> From: amy casamassa <amytcas at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [MissoulaGov] Committee Update 9-30-09 Bikes on Sidewalks
> To: missoulagov at cmslists.com
> Message-ID:
> ??? <2f9b529f0910061229v69873d67pdb9a3149a6351c2c at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>
> I completely agree with the statement below from kjerrim at missoula.com.? In
> addition, I think trying to paint cyclists as toddler-smashing,
> downtown-ruining, menaces to society is just plain silly.? Accidents do
> happen due to people not paying attention, not knowing the rules, or just
> plain not caring about others, but for the most part we live in a pretty
> tolerant place. I consider myself progressive, but I think a silly road to
> go down is believing that legislating tolerance and courteousness will
> really stop intolerance or discourteousness.
>
>
> I appreciate what the BID is attempting to do for bikes from Broadway to
> the
> X's, but these ordinances that pertain to behavior have got to stop.? Bums
> and bikes are not the reason why downtowns are failing.? Are we really
> pretending that there is any truth to that?? You could strategically place
> proximity mines in front of Super Walmart and people would still fight to
> get in there.? We all know that a large reason downtowns are failing
> isbecause it costs considerably more to buy something from asmalllocal
> business than it does to buy it from a box store.? Despite the fact that I
> know that, I make a conscious effort to buy locally.? There are many
> reasons
> why, not the least of which being that I love this town and the character
> that comes with it.? I find that the things I buy may cost more downtown,
> but are more special (and let?s face it, less toxic) than things I can find
> in a box store.? Last year all the gifts I bought for Christmas came from
> stores downtown or south of the bridge on Higgins.? I am willing to spend
> more to keep businesses alive in Missoula.? I feel like Missoula isn?t an
> over-regulated place and I think that means we trust our citizenry to make
> choices with the community in mind.? I understand that the BID and City
> Council are working towards making downtown a desirable and convenient
> place
> to shop, but I don?t think the way to do that is to make downtown Missoula
> a
> whitewashed, cutsey-bootsie, over-regulated, Park City-esque mountain town.
> Which is what I see happening with these laws to stop people from doing
> things that a portion of the population finds annoying.? Not
> dangerous-annoying.? If that is the case, then those downtown businesses
> can
> kiss my dollars goodbye.
>
> Amy T. Cas
>
> On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 6:38 PM, <kjerrim at missoula.com> wrote:
> I think the whole point I am hearing raised is enough with all these
> ordinances pertaining to behavioral problems that some find annoying but
> others may not.
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://www.cmslists.com/pipermail/missoulagov/attachments/20091006/36edd10b/attachment.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 13:40:20 -0600
> From: Ethel MacDonald <ethelmacd at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [MissoulaGov] Committee Update 9-30-09 Bikes on Sidewalks
> To: Pam Walzer <pamwalzer at gmail.com>
> Cc: missoulagov at cmslists.com
> Message-ID:
> ??? <49c658a60910061240q56f2781arb5136131ce48a667 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Well-said, Pam!? Remind me to send you $$ when you have to go through the
> re-election hassle.? We need people like you on CC who see more than one
> side of things and try to work together in peace (and fortunately, most CC
> members do, in my opinion.)? ? Ethel
>
> On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 11:51 AM, Pam Walzer <pamwalzer at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > All,
> >
> > Thank you all for this discussion - and those past. I rarely chime in,
> > rather I prefer listen to what this participating community is saying.
> Much
> > has been said in this conversation that I finally would like to add to or
> > clarify.
> >
> > To put into perspective how much the City of Missoula collects in taxes
> on
> > residential properties, and therefore what a "large tax break" that
> Jeremy
> > Hood suggested would look like, I took a gander at my last year's
> property
> > tax bill. I have a modest home in the Westside. Probably overpriced due
> to
> > its location and very grateful to have purchased it when it was truly
> > affordable. I'm guessing it's tue, open market value is now on the high
> end
> > of today's "affordable" to low side of median price for Missoula.
> >
> > For all that the City of Missoula provides me: fire, police, streets -
> with
> > or without potholes, traffic lights, snow and leaf removal, parks, open
> > space protection, zoning protection to make sure a tire manufacturer
> doesn't
> > open up next door to me, on and on .... I paid $403.08 last year in
> *CITY*taxes, or $33.59 per month. That's less than my satellite TV bill! I
> also
> > gladly paid an additional $71.25 per year in a permenant SID to pay for
> > extra neighborhood street and alley lighting - although much of that goes
> to
> > Northwestern to rent the light poles. So for less than $40/month in taxes
> to
> > the City of Missoula, I get all the services, tangible and intangible,
> that
> > the city provides to its citizens, businesses and visitors (who, by the
> > way, pay NO direct taxes to the city).
> >
> > To follow one of Jeremy's ideas (which is similar to many others about
> the
> > value of tax breaks) - let's give owners of rental properties a break in
> > their city taxes so they can pass it off in lower rentals.? Reducing the
> > rent on property like mine $40/month is not going to make it any more
> > affordable to rent (or even own). In the mean time, the city would no
> longer
> > have all of those small, individual revenues to provide for those myriad
> of
> > services we all need or want. If we, as a community, want all of those
> > things that the city provides, then who is going to pay? Increase the
> taxes
> > on owner occupied homes? Increase the property taxes on businesses? As
> much
> > as I want to do what I can support local business, I'm pretty sure the
> > courts would find it a constitutional problem with the city taxing Home
> > Depot more than Boyce Lumber, or REI or more than Trailhead. If you want
> to
> > support local, than do just that - spend your dollars at Quality Supply,
> > Orange St. Food Farm, downtown stores, etc... We are fortunate that we do
> > have numerous high quality and reasonably priced local and Montana based
> > businesses to choose from.
> >
> > So how can the city solve some of the problems like real or perceived
> > blight on Brooks corridor or West Broadway or Russell St.? As Geoff
> Badenoch
> > said, the city has the MRA to encourage and assist in the redevelopement
> of
> > areas like these around the city. But private business has to be willing
> and
> > feel that a profit can be made. Last night we passed the zoning ordinance
> > rewrite. A small part of that document provides zoning tools that will
> make
> > it easier for developers to do mixed use development. During the West
> > Broadway charette process, the consultants said that there was a
> significant
> > impediment to reaching the vision that the community saw for the area -
> we
> > did not have zoning that would allow the implementation of that vision.
> > Now we have that. Will West Broadway suddenly become the vision, with
> tree
> > lined streets with landscaped medians and lots of pedestrians and small
> > shops with apartments above with everyone smiling and happy and well
> > dressed? No, it will be a long evolutionary process, one that requires
> the
> > business community and the city government to continue to work together.
> The
> > city can't do it alone, but we can help the process. By having a plan and
> > providing tools with zoning and the MRA, we are helping the process
> along.
> >
> > So what can the city do to improve the economy in Missoula? Besides what
> > Geoff B. and Jim McGraff have already listed that we actually do, I
> believe
> > we keep on doing what we do so well - keep Missoula a wonderful place to
> > live and do business. That means worrying about the minutia of daily
> living:
> > dogs at large, bears in dumpsters, cars speeding in neighborhoods, bikes
> > "speeding" on sidewalks, cars not providing bikes a safe share of the
> > road, bikes stopping or not at stop signs, people driving while
> distracted
> > by cell phones, boulevard tree maintenance. Some people find these things
> a
> > threat to their safety and well-being, others feel that they have a right
> > to act how they personally feel is safe and/or appropriate, others feel
> that
> > these are silly common sense or manners things and that the city should
> stay
> > out of it. What a wonderful society we would be it we ALL lived by the
> > golden rule. Very few, if any, laws would be necessary. But look into
> your
> > hearts and your actions, the actions of your neighbors, and "that idiot
> down
> > the street" and realize that essentially all we do on council is to try
> to
> > protect your and your neighbor's quality of life in the City of Missoula.
> > There is at least one thing, probably many, that the city regulates (or
> > doesn't!) that you feel is absolutely necessary. Likewise, I'm sure there
> is
> > at least one thing, probably many, that you think is a complete waste of
> > time and energy - but that just happens to be something that someone else
> > feels is extremely important for them. So the city council spends a lot
> of
> > time deciding how we, with very limited resources, can keep Missoula a
> > wonderful place to live and work while it grows and evolves over the
> years.
> >
> > Thank you for your patience in my ruminating. It's obvious why I rarely
> > participate.
> >
> > Pam Walzer,
> > Missoula City Council
> > Alderwoman, Ward 2
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > -----Please delete extra content when replying to messages------
> >
> > Note: This list is NOT an official service of the City Of Missoula. But
> > posts to this list may be entered into the public record.
> > Subscribe or view archives at Missoulagov.org
> > List Serve hosting provided by www.CedarMountainSoftware.com<
> http://www.cedarmountainsoftware.com/>.
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> "Apathy is a vice."? Oscar Wilde
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://www.cmslists.com/pipermail/missoulagov/attachments/20091006/244130d5/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 19:31:39 -0600
> From: "David V. Gray" <hdgray at modwest.com>
> Subject: Re: [MissoulaGov] Committee Update 9-30-09 Bikes on Sidewalks
> To: "'amy casamassa'" <amytcas at gmail.com>,??? <missoulagov at cmslists.com>
> Message-ID: <010701ca46ed$eb3ac050$c1b040f0$@com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> God this is the such a beautiful email. Way to go Amy.
>
>
>
> David V. Gray
>
>
>
> From: missoulagov-bounces at cmslists.com
> [mailto:missoulagov-bounces at cmslists.com] On Behalf Of amy casamassa
> Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 1:30 PM
> To: missoulagov at cmslists.com
> Subject: Re: [MissoulaGov] Committee Update 9-30-09 Bikes on Sidewalks
>
>
>
> I completely agree with the statement below from kjerrim at missoula.com.? In
> addition, I think trying to paint cyclists as toddler-smashing,
> downtown-ruining, menaces to society is just plain silly.? Accidents do
> happen due to people not paying attention, not knowing the rules, or just
> plain not caring about others, but for the most part we live in a pretty
> tolerant place. I consider myself progressive, but I think a silly road to
> go down is believing that legislating tolerance and courteousness will
> really stop intolerance or discourteousness.? ?
>
>
> I appreciate what the BID is attempting to do for bikes from Broadway to
> the
> X's, but these ordinances that pertain to behavior have got to stop.? Bums
> and bikes are not the reason why downtowns are failing.? Are we really
> pretending that there is any truth to that?? You could strategically place
> proximity mines in front of Super Walmart and people would still fight to
> get in there.? We all know that a large reason downtowns are failing is
> because it costs considerably more to buy something from a small local
> business than it does to buy it from a box store.? Despite the fact that I
> know that, I make a conscious effort to buy locally.? There are many
> reasons
> why, not the least of which being that I love this town and the character
> that comes with it.? I find that the things I buy may cost more downtown,
> but are more special (and let's face it, less toxic) than things I can find
> in a box store.? Last year all the gifts I bought for Christmas came from
> stores downtown or south of the bridge on Higgins.? I am willing to spend
> more to keep businesses alive in Missoula.? I feel like Missoula isn't an
> over-regulated place and I think that means we trust our citizenry to make
> choices with the community in mind.? I understand that the BID and City
> Council are working towards making downtown a desirable and convenient
> place
> to shop, but I don't think the way to do that is to make downtown Missoula
> a
> whitewashed, cutsey-bootsie, over-regulated, Park City-esque mountain town.
> Which is what I see happening with these laws to stop people from doing
> things that a portion of the population finds annoying.? Not
> dangerous-annoying.? If that is the case, then those downtown businesses
> can
> kiss my dollars goodbye.
>
> Amy T. Cas
>
> On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 6:38 PM, <kjerrim at missoula.com> wrote:
>
> I think the whole point I am hearing raised is enough with all these
> ordinances pertaining to behavioral problems that some find annoying but
> others may not.
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://www.cmslists.com/pipermail/missoulagov/attachments/20091006/abfdfacb/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> -------Please delete extra content when replying to messages--------
> Note: This list is NOT an official service of the City Of Missoula. But
> posts to this list may be entered into the public record.
> Subscribe or view archives at Missoulagov.org
> List Serve hosting provided by www.CedarMountainSoftware.com.
>
> End of MissoulaGov Digest, Vol 44, Issue 7
> ******************************************
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://www.cmslists.com/pipermail/missoulagov/attachments/20091007/f064044d/attachment.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 17:31:07 -0600 (MDT)
> From: "Bob Giordano" <mist at strans.org>
> Subject: [MissoulaGov] Bikes on Sidewalks
> To: missoulagov at cmslists.com
> Message-ID:
> <3972.150.131.82.22.1254958267.squirrel at webmail.modwest.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8
>
> I think it is critical to talk about safe cycling conditions on downtown
> streets along with sidewalk discussions. At Free Cycles, we require a
> bikewell safety and maintenance class before someone builds a free bike.
> Well over 500 went thru the class last year. Some are homeless, some are
> prelease from prison, many are students, many everyday people, and so on.
> People generall do not want to ride on the sidewalk, but feel unsafe on
> some arterials.
>
> That is one major reason MIST advocates for 6 (or 7) foot bike lanes, out
> from car doors, maintained weekly, and connected (for arterial roads).
> Trails and a good neighborhood network provide further options. In essence
> we have 3 bike systems connecting into one network: neighborhoods,
> arterials, trails...
>
> --
> Bob Giordano
> Free Cycles Missoula 541.7284
> Missoula Institute for Sustainable Transportation
> www.strans.org, mist at strans.org, 406.880.6834
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 18:04:22 -0600
> From: Bob Jaffe <BJaffe at ci.missoula.mt.us>
> Subject: Re: [MissoulaGov] Bikes on Sidewalks
> To: Everest Designs <everestdesigns at yahoo.com>,
> "missoulagov at cmslists.com" <missoulagov at cmslists.com>
> Message-ID:
> <
> 19A25C7C0336974B8751A91F13C7B8E1045458BE14 at Mailserver09.ci.missoula.mt.us>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> I pretty much hear everyone saying the same thing here so folks don't need
> to get too riled up.
> People need to be aware that riding a bike on the sidewalk creates a hazard
> for others.
>
> Of course we have a Jay walking law and I believe those smaller scooters
> actually are classified the same as bikes.
>
>
>
> From: missoulagov-bounces at cmslists.com [mailto:
> missoulagov-bounces at cmslists.com] On Behalf Of Everest Designs
> Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 12:59 PM
> To: missoulagov at cmslists.com
> Subject: [MissoulaGov] Bikes on Sidewalks
>
> Ok then we should allow all the cool progressive people who buy small
> scooters from scooterville to ride on the sidewalks too----yeah let's just
> ride r bikes any way we want with out any rules like----ya know like J
> walking which really isn't a problem but somehow I bet there is legislation
> in place at the city level. Just walk your bike---whats the big deal.
>
> Matt
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --- On Wed, 10/7/09, missoulagov-request at cmslists.com <
> missoulagov-request at cmslists.com> wrote:
>
> From: missoulagov-request at cmslists.com <missoulagov-request at cmslists.com>
> Subject: MissoulaGov Digest, Vol 44, Issue 7
> To: missoulagov at cmslists.com
> Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 12:00 PM
> Send MissoulaGov mailing list submissions to
> missoulagov at cmslists.com<
> http://us.mc529.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=missoulagov@cmslists.com>
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://www.cmslists.com/mailman/listinfo/missoulagov
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> missoulagov-request at cmslists.com<
> http://us.mc529.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=missoulagov-request@cmslists.com
> >
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> missoulagov-owner at cmslists.com<
> http://us.mc529.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=missoulagov-owner@cmslists.com
> >
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of MissoulaGov digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: Committee Update 9-30-09 Bikes on Sidewalks (amy casamassa)
> 2. Re: Committee Update 9-30-09 Bikes on Sidewalks (Ethel MacDonald)
> 3. Re: Committee Update 9-30-09 Bikes on Sidewalks (David V. Gray)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 13:29:51 -0600
> From: amy casamassa <amytcas at gmail.com<
> http://us.mc529.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=amytcas@gmail.com>>
> Subject: Re: [MissoulaGov] Committee Update 9-30-09 Bikes on Sidewalks
> To: missoulagov at cmslists.com<
> http://us.mc529.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=missoulagov@cmslists.com>
> Message-ID:
> <2f9b529f0910061229v69873d67pdb9a3149a6351c2c at mail.gmail.com<
> http://us.mc529.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=2f9b529f0910061229v69873d67pdb9a3149a6351c2c@mail.gmail.com
> >>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>
> I completely agree with the statement below from kjerrim at missoula.com<
> http://us.mc529.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=kjerrim@missoula.com>. In
> addition, I think trying to paint cyclists as toddler-smashing,
> downtown-ruining, menaces to society is just plain silly. Accidents do
> happen due to people not paying attention, not knowing the rules, or just
> plain not caring about others, but for the most part we live in a pretty
> tolerant place. I consider myself progressive, but I think a silly road to
> go down is believing that legislating tolerance and courteousness will
> really stop intolerance or discourteousness.
>
>
> I appreciate what the BID is attempting to do for bikes from Broadway to
> the
> X's, but these ordinances that pertain to behavior have got to stop. Bums
> and bikes are not the reason why downtowns are failing. Are we really
> pretending that there is any truth to that? You could strategically place
> proximity mines in front of Super Walmart and people would still fight to
> get in there. We all know that a large reason downtowns are failing
> isbecause it costs considerably more to buy something from asmalllocal
> business than it does to buy it from a box store. Despite the fact that I
> know that, I make a conscious effort to buy locally. There are many
> reasons
> why, not the least of which being that I love this town and the character
> that comes with it. I find that the things I buy may cost more downtown,
> but are more special (and let?s face it, less toxic) than things I can find
> in a box store. Last year all the gifts I bought for Christmas came from
> stores downtown or south of the bridge on Higgins. I am willing to spend
> more to keep businesses alive in Missoula. I feel like Missoula isn?t an
> over-regulated place and I think that means we trust our citizenry to make
> choices with the community in mind. I understand that the BID and City
> Council are working towards making downtown a desirable and convenient
> place
> to shop, but I don?t think the way to do that is to make downtown Missoula
> a
> whitewashed, cutsey-bootsie, over-regulated, Park City-esque mountain town.
> Which is what I see happening with these laws to stop people from doing
> things that a portion of the population finds annoying. Not
> dangerous-annoying. If that is the case, then those downtown businesses
> can
> kiss my dollars goodbye.
>
> Amy T. Cas
>
> On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 6:38 PM, <kjerrim at missoula.com<
> http://us.mc529.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=kjerrim@missoula.com>> wrote:
> I think the whole point I am hearing raised is enough with all these
> ordinances pertaining to behavioral problems that some find annoying but
> others may not.
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://www.cmslists.com/pipermail/missoulagov/attachments/20091006/36edd10b/attachment.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 13:40:20 -0600
> From: Ethel MacDonald <ethelmacd at gmail.com<
> http://us.mc529.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=ethelmacd@gmail.com>>
> Subject: Re: [MissoulaGov] Committee Update 9-30-09 Bikes on Sidewalks
> To: Pam Walzer <pamwalzer at gmail.com<
> http://us.mc529.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=pamwalzer@gmail.com>>
> Cc: missoulagov at cmslists.com<
> http://us.mc529.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=missoulagov@cmslists.com>
> Message-ID:
> <49c658a60910061240q56f2781arb5136131ce48a667 at mail.gmail.com<
> http://us.mc529.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=49c658a60910061240q56f2781arb5136131ce48a667@mail.gmail.com
> >>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Well-said, Pam! Remind me to send you $$ when you have to go through the
> re-election hassle. We need people like you on CC who see more than one
> side of things and try to work together in peace (and fortunately, most CC
> members do, in my opinion.) Ethel
>
> On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 11:51 AM, Pam Walzer <pamwalzer at gmail.com<
> http://us.mc529.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=pamwalzer@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> > All,
> >
> > Thank you all for this discussion - and those past. I rarely chime in,
> > rather I prefer listen to what this participating community is saying.
> Much
> > has been said in this conversation that I finally would like to add to or
> > clarify.
> >
> > To put into perspective how much the City of Missoula collects in taxes
> on
> > residential properties, and therefore what a "large tax break" that
> Jeremy
> > Hood suggested would look like, I took a gander at my last year's
> property
> > tax bill. I have a modest home in the Westside. Probably overpriced due
> to
> > its location and very grateful to have purchased it when it was truly
> > affordable. I'm guessing it's tue, open market value is now on the high
> end
> > of today's "affordable" to low side of median price for Missoula.
> >
> > For all that the City of Missoula provides me: fire, police, streets -
> with
> > or without potholes, traffic lights, snow and leaf removal, parks, open
> > space protection, zoning protection to make sure a tire manufacturer
> doesn't
> > open up next door to me, on and on .... I paid $403.08 last year in
> *CITY*taxes, or $33.59 per month. That's less than my satellite TV bill! I
> also
> > gladly paid an additional $71.25 per year in a permenant SID to pay for
> > extra neighborhood street and alley lighting - although much of that goes
> to
> > Northwestern to rent the light poles. So for less than $40/month in taxes
> to
> > the City of Missoula, I get all the services, tangible and intangible,
> that
> > the city provides to its citizens, businesses and visitors (who, by the
> > way, pay NO direct taxes to the city).
> >
> > To follow one of Jeremy's ideas (which is similar to many others about
> the
> > value of tax breaks) - let's give owners of rental properties a break in
> > their city taxes so they can pass it off in lower rentals. Reducing the
> > rent on property like mine $40/month is not going to make it any more
> > affordable to rent (or even own). In the mean time, the city would no
> longer
> > have all of those small, individual revenues to provide for those myriad
> of
> > services we all need or want. If we, as a community, want all of those
> > things that the city provides, then who is going to pay? Increase the
> taxes
> > on owner occupied homes? Increase the property taxes on businesses? As
> much
> > as I want to do what I can support local business, I'm pretty sure the
> > courts would find it a constitutional problem with the city taxing Home
> > Depot more than Boyce Lumber, or REI or more than Trailhead. If you want
> to
> > support local, than do just that - spend your dollars at Quality Supply,
> > Orange St. Food Farm, downtown stores, etc... We are fortunate that we do
> > have numerous high quality and reasonably priced local and Montana based
> > businesses to choose from.
> >
> > So how can the city solve some of the problems like real or perceived
> > blight on Brooks corridor or West Broadway or Russell St.? As Geoff
> Badenoch
> > said, the city has the MRA to encourage and assist in the redevelopement
> of
> > areas like these around the city. But private business has to be willing
> and
> > feel that a profit can be made. Last night we passed the zoning ordinance
> > rewrite. A small part of that document provides zoning tools that will
> make
> > it easier for developers to do mixed use development. During the West
> > Broadway charette process, the consultants said that there was a
> significant
> > impediment to reaching the vision that the community saw for the area -
> we
> > did not have zoning that would allow the implementation of that vision.
> > Now we have that. Will West Broadway suddenly become the vision, with
> tree
> > lined streets with landscaped medians and lots of pedestrians and small
> > shops with apartments above with everyone smiling and happy and well
> > dressed? No, it will be a long evolutionary process, one that requires
> the
> > business community and the city government to continue to work together.
> The
> > city can't do it alone, but we can help the process. By having a plan and
> > providing tools with zoning and the MRA, we are helping the process
> along.
> >
> > So what can the city do to improve the economy in Missoula? Besides what
> > Geoff B. and Jim McGraff have already listed that we actually do, I
> believe
> > we keep on doing what we do so well - keep Missoula a wonderful place to
> > live and do business. That means worrying about the minutia of daily
> living:
> > dogs at large, bears in dumpsters, cars speeding in neighborhoods, bikes
> > "speeding" on sidewalks, cars not providing bikes a safe share of the
> > road, bikes stopping or not at stop signs, people driving while
> distracted
> > by cell phones, boulevard tree maintenance. Some people find these things
> a
> > threat to their safety and well-being, others feel that they have a right
> > to act how they personally feel is safe and/or appropriate, others feel
> that
> > these are silly common sense or manners things and that the city should
> stay
> > out of it. What a wonderful society we would be it we ALL lived by the
> > golden rule. Very few, if any, laws would be necessary. But look into
> your
> > hearts and your actions, the actions of your neighbors, and "that idiot
> down
> > the street" and realize that essentially all we do on council is to try
> to
> > protect your and your neighbor's quality of life in the City of Missoula.
> > There is at least one thing, probably many, that the city regulates (or
> > doesn't!) that you feel is absolutely necessary. Likewise, I'm sure there
> is
> > at least one thing, probably many, that you think is a complete waste of
> > time and energy - but that just happens to be something that someone else
> > feels is extremely important for them. So the city council spends a lot
> of
> > time deciding how we, with very limited resources, can keep Missoula a
> > wonderful place to live and work while it grows and evolves over the
> years.
> >
> > Thank you for your patience in my ruminating. It's obvious why I rarely
> > participate.
> >
> > Pam Walzer,
> > Missoula City Council
> > Alderwoman, Ward 2
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > -----Please delete extra content when replying to messages------
> >
> > Note: This list is NOT an official service of the City Of Missoula. But
> > posts to this list may be entered into the public record.
> > Subscribe or view archives at Missoulagov.org
> > List Serve hosting provided by www.CedarMountainSoftware.com<
> http://www.cedarmountainsoftware.com/>.
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> "Apathy is a vice." Oscar Wilde
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://www.cmslists.com/pipermail/missoulagov/attachments/20091006/244130d5/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 19:31:39 -0600
> From: "David V. Gray" <hdgray at modwest.com<
> http://us.mc529.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=hdgray@modwest.com>>
> Subject: Re: [MissoulaGov] Committee Update 9-30-09 Bikes on Sidewalks
> To: "'amy casamassa'" <amytcas at gmail.com<
> http://us.mc529.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=amytcas@gmail.com>>, <
> missoulagov at cmslists.com<
> http://us.mc529.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=missoulagov@cmslists.com>>
> Message-ID: <010701ca46ed$eb3ac050$c1b040f0$@com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> God this is the such a beautiful email. Way to go Amy.
>
>
>
> David V. Gray
>
>
>
> From: missoulagov-bounces at cmslists.com<
> http://us.mc529.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=missoulagov-bounces@cmslists.com
> >
> [mailto:missoulagov-bounces at cmslists.com<
> http://us.mc529.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=missoulagov-bounces@cmslists.com>]
> On Behalf Of amy casamassa
> Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 1:30 PM
> To: missoulagov at cmslists.com<
> http://us.mc529.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=missoulagov@cmslists.com>
> Subject: Re: [MissoulaGov] Committee Update 9-30-09 Bikes on Sidewalks
>
>
>
> I completely agree with the statement below from kjerrim at missoula.com<
> http://us.mc529.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=kjerrim@missoula.com>. In
> addition, I think trying to paint cyclists as toddler-smashing,
> downtown-ruining, menaces to society is just plain silly. Accidents do
> happen due to people not paying attention, not knowing the rules, or just
> plain not caring about others, but for the most part we live in a pretty
> tolerant place. I consider myself progressive, but I think a silly road to
> go down is believing that legislating tolerance and courteousness will
> really stop intolerance or discourteousness.
>
>
> I appreciate what the BID is attempting to do for bikes from Broadway to
> the
> X's, but these ordinances that pertain to behavior have got to stop. Bums
> and bikes are not the reason why downtowns are failing. Are we really
> pretending that there is any truth to that? You could strategically place
> proximity mines in front of Super Walmart and people would still fight to
> get in there. We all know that a large reason downtowns are failing is
> because it costs considerably more to buy something from a small local
> business than it does to buy it from a box store. Despite the fact that I
> know that, I make a conscious effort to buy locally. There are many
> reasons
> why, not the least of which being that I love this town and the character
> that comes with it. I find that the things I buy may cost more downtown,
> but are more special (and let's face it, less toxic) than things I can find
> in a box store. Last year all the gifts I bought for Christmas came from
> stores downtown or south of the bridge on Higgins. I am willing to spend
> more to keep businesses alive in Missoula. I feel like Missoula isn't an
> over-regulated place and I think that means we trust our citizenry to make
> choices with the community in mind. I understand that the BID and City
> Council are working towards making downtown a desirable and convenient
> place
> to shop, but I don't think the way to do that is to make downtown Missoula
> a
> whitewashed, cutsey-bootsie, over-regulated, Park City-esque mountain town.
> Which is what I see happening with these laws to stop people from doing
> things that a portion of the population finds annoying. Not
> dangerous-annoying. If that is the case, then those downtown businesses
> can
> kiss my dollars goodbye.
>
> Amy T. Cas
>
> On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 6:38 PM, <kjerrim at missoula.com<
> http://us.mc529.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=kjerrim@missoula.com>> wrote:
>
> I think the whole point I am hearing raised is enough with all these
> ordinances pertaining to behavioral problems that some find annoying but
> others may not.
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://www.cmslists.com/pipermail/missoulagov/attachments/20091006/abfdfacb/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> -------Please delete extra content when replying to messages--------
> Note: This list is NOT an official service of the City Of Missoula. But
> posts to this list may be entered into the public record.
> Subscribe or view archives at Missoulagov.org
> List Serve hosting provided by www.CedarMountainSoftware.com.
>
> End of MissoulaGov Digest, Vol 44, Issue 7
> ******************************************
>
>
>
> Messages and attachments sent to or from this e-mail account pertaining to
> City business may be considered public or private records depending on the
> message content. The City is often required by law to provide public records
> to individuals requesting them. The City is also required by law to protect
> private, confidential information. This message is intended for the use of
> the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient
> of this transmission, please notify the sender immediately, do not forward
> the message to anyone, and delete all copies. Thank you
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://www.cmslists.com/pipermail/missoulagov/attachments/20091007/e5d71f1f/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 17:48:10 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Everest Designs <everestdesigns at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [MissoulaGov] Bikes on Sidewalks
> To: Andrew Stickney <stickneyal at gmail.com>
> Cc: missoulagov at cmslists.com
> Message-ID: <677168.7202.qm at web52905.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>
> Hi Andrew---
> ?
> Let me provide some background as well.?? I owned and operated Sherpa
> Mountain Import Company at the corner of Higgins and Broadway from 1997 to
> 2004.?? I rode my bike to work during the dry season and as you say was one
> of those polite riders giving right of way to pedestrians while on my short
> cruise up the sidewalk to my store front.??? The balance of good riders and
> problem riders was not at all in balance or self regulated to be safe in my
> opinion.?? Bike riders on the street?seem much?more in control and have
> respect of?traffic laws and cars.???I noticed bikers who ride on the
> sidewalks too often do not yeild and are sometimes seen with a dog in tow
> holding a leash in one hand or a cup of hot coffee.?? The downtown business
> district is very congested at times and you know what Saturday morning looks
> like on those sidewalks.?? Also most business these days have sandwich
> boards that further restrict the area for pedestrians and
> bikes.? The Montana anotated has no bearing on what the citizens of
> Missoula decide is safe in their downtown area.?? I don't think this
> discussion is meant to include any areas other than the downtown business
> district.???I would?not ask that the UM institute a no sidewalk policy for
> bikes.?
> ?
> Sincerely
> ?
> Matt
>
>
> Everest Designs
> 1.877.754.4287
> everestdesigns at yahoo.com
> everestdesigns.net
> ?
>
> ?
> ?
> ?
>
> ?
>
> --- On Wed, 10/7/09, Andrew Stickney <stickneyal at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> From: Andrew Stickney <stickneyal at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [MissoulaGov] Bikes on Sidewalks
> To: "Everest Designs" <everestdesigns at yahoo.com>
> Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 1:41 PM
>
>
> Hi Matt,
>
>
> Regardless of what previous discussions may have implied, bicycle riding on
> sidewalks is in fact subject to state law and in most circumstances have the
> same rights and privileges of a pedestrian, including the responsibility to
> yield to other pedestrians:
>
>
> http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/mca/61/8/61-8-608.htm?(MCA<http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/mca/61/8/61-8-608.htm?%28MCA>61-8-808).?
>
>
> Scooters fall under a different classification - "motor-driven cycles" as
> defined here:
> http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/mca/61/1/61-1-101.htm?(MCA<http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/mca/61/1/61-1-101.htm?%28MCA>61-1-101)
>
>
> As Amy said earlier, most bicyclists do in fact yield to pedestrians and
> walk their bikes when appropriate. We are very aware of our special
> privileges and do our best to self-regulate our behavior. We do not need any
> more city ordinances to help us out in this matter - it only increases
> antagonism and bad feelings.
>
>
> Sincerely yours,
>
>
>
>
> Andrew Stickney
> stickneyal at gmail.com
>
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Everest Designs <everestdesigns at yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Ok then we should allow all the cool progressive people who buy small
> scooters from scooterville to ride on the sidewalks too----yeah let's just
> ride r bikes any way we want with out any rules like----ya know like J
> walking which really isn't a problem but somehow I bet there is legislation
> in place?at the city level.???? Just walk your bike---whats the big deal.
> ?
> Matt
>
>
>
>
> ?
> ?
> ?
>
> ?
>
> --- On Wed, 10/7/09, missoulagov-request at cmslists.com <
> missoulagov-request at cmslists.com> wrote:
>
>
> From: missoulagov-request at cmslists.com <missoulagov-request at cmslists.com>
> Subject: MissoulaGov Digest, Vol 44, Issue 7
> To: missoulagov at cmslists.com
> Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 12:00 PM
>
>
> Send MissoulaGov mailing list submissions to
> ??? missoulagov at cmslists.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> ??? http://www.cmslists.com/mailman/listinfo/missoulagov
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> ??? missoulagov-request at cmslists.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> ??? missoulagov-owner at cmslists.com
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of MissoulaGov digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> ???1. Re: Committee Update 9-30-09 Bikes on Sidewalks (amy casamassa)
> ???2. Re: Committee Update 9-30-09 Bikes on Sidewalks (Ethel MacDonald)
> ???3. Re: Committee Update 9-30-09 Bikes on Sidewalks (David V. Gray)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 13:29:51 -0600
> From: amy casamassa <amytcas at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [MissoulaGov] Committee Update 9-30-09 Bikes on Sidewalks
> To: missoulagov at cmslists.com
> Message-ID:
> ??? <2f9b529f0910061229v69873d67pdb9a3149a6351c2c at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>
> I completely agree with the statement below from kjerrim at missoula.com.? In
> addition, I think trying to paint cyclists as toddler-smashing,
> downtown-ruining, menaces to society is just plain silly.? Accidents do
> happen due to people not paying attention, not knowing the rules, or just
> plain not caring about others, but for the most part we live in a pretty
> tolerant place. I consider myself progressive, but I think a silly road to
> go down is believing that legislating tolerance and courteousness will
> really stop intolerance or discourteousness.
>
>
> I appreciate what the BID is attempting to do for bikes from Broadway to
> the
> X's, but these ordinances that pertain to behavior have got to stop.? Bums
> and bikes are not the reason why downtowns are failing.? Are we really
> pretending that there is any truth to that?? You could strategically place
> proximity mines in front of Super Walmart and people would still fight to
> get in there.? We all know that a large reason downtowns are failing
> isbecause it costs considerably more to buy something from asmalllocal
> business than it does to buy it from a box store.? Despite the fact that I
> know that, I make a conscious effort to buy locally.? There are many
> reasons
> why, not the least of which being that I love this town and the character
> that comes with it.? I find that the things I buy may cost more downtown,
> but are more special (and let?s face it, less toxic) than things I can find
> in a box store.? Last year all the gifts I bought for Christmas came from
> stores downtown or south of the bridge on Higgins.? I am willing to spend
> more to keep businesses alive in Missoula.? I feel like Missoula isn?t an
> over-regulated place and I think that means we trust our citizenry to make
> choices with the community in mind.? I understand that the BID and City
> Council are working towards making downtown a desirable and convenient
> place
> to shop, but I don?t think the way to do that is to make downtown Missoula
> a
> whitewashed, cutsey-bootsie, over-regulated, Park City-esque mountain town.
> Which is what I see happening with these laws to stop people from doing
> things that a portion of the population finds annoying.? Not
> dangerous-annoying.? If that is the case, then those downtown businesses
> can
> kiss my dollars goodbye.
>
> Amy T. Cas
>
> On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 6:38 PM, <kjerrim at missoula.com> wrote:
> I think the whole point I am hearing raised is enough with all these
> ordinances pertaining to behavioral problems that some find annoying but
> others may not.
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://www.cmslists.com/pipermail/missoulagov/attachments/20091006/36edd10b/attachment.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 13:40:20 -0600
> From: Ethel MacDonald <ethelmacd at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [MissoulaGov] Committee Update 9-30-09 Bikes on Sidewalks
> To: Pam Walzer <pamwalzer at gmail.com>
> Cc: missoulagov at cmslists.com
> Message-ID:
> ??? <49c658a60910061240q56f2781arb5136131ce48a667 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Well-said, Pam!? Remind me to send you $$ when you have to go through the
> re-election hassle.? We need people like you on CC who see more than one
> side of things and try to work together in peace (and fortunately, most CC
> members do, in my opinion.)? ? Ethel
>
> On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 11:51 AM, Pam Walzer <pamwalzer at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > All,
> >
> > Thank you all for this discussion - and those past. I rarely chime in,
> > rather I prefer listen to what this participating community is saying.
> Much
> > has been said in this conversation that I finally would like to add to or
> > clarify.
> >
> > To put into perspective how much the City of Missoula collects in taxes
> on
> > residential properties, and therefore what a "large tax break" that
> Jeremy
> > Hood suggested would look like, I took a gander at my last year's
> property
> > tax bill. I have a modest home in the Westside. Probably overpriced due
> to
> > its location and very grateful to have purchased it when it was truly
> > affordable. I'm guessing it's tue, open market value is now on the high
> end
> > of today's "affordable" to low side of median price for Missoula.
> >
> > For all that the City of Missoula provides me: fire, police, streets -
> with
> > or without potholes, traffic lights, snow and leaf removal, parks, open
> > space protection, zoning protection to make sure a tire manufacturer
> doesn't
> > open up next door to me, on and on .... I paid $403.08 last year in
> *CITY*taxes, or $33.59 per month. That's less than my satellite TV bill! I
> also
> > gladly paid an additional $71.25 per year in a permenant SID to pay for
> > extra neighborhood street and alley lighting - although much of that goes
> to
> > Northwestern to rent the light poles. So for less than $40/month in taxes
> to
> > the City of Missoula, I get all the services, tangible and intangible,
> that
> > the city provides to its citizens, businesses and visitors (who, by the
> > way, pay NO direct taxes to the city).
> >
> > To follow one of Jeremy's ideas (which is similar to many others about
> the
> > value of tax breaks) - let's give owners of rental properties a break in
> > their city taxes so they can pass it off in lower rentals.? Reducing the
> > rent on property like mine $40/month is not going to make it any more
> > affordable to rent (or even own). In the mean time, the city would no
> longer
> > have all of those small, individual revenues to provide for those myriad
> of
> > services we all need or want. If we, as a community, want all of those
> > things that the city provides, then who is going to pay? Increase the
> taxes
> > on owner occupied homes? Increase the property taxes on businesses? As
> much
> > as I want to do what I can support local business, I'm pretty sure the
> > courts would find it a constitutional problem with the city taxing Home
> > Depot more than Boyce Lumber, or REI or more than Trailhead. If you want
> to
> > support local, than do just that - spend your dollars at Quality Supply,
> > Orange St. Food Farm, downtown stores, etc... We are fortunate that we do
> > have numerous high quality and reasonably priced local and Montana based
> > businesses to choose from.
> >
> > So how can the city solve some of the problems like real or perceived
> > blight on Brooks corridor or West Broadway or Russell St.? As Geoff
> Badenoch
> > said, the city has the MRA to encourage and assist in the redevelopement
> of
> > areas like these around the city. But private business has to be willing
> and
> > feel that a profit can be made. Last night we passed the zoning ordinance
> > rewrite. A small part of that document provides zoning tools that will
> make
> > it easier for developers to do mixed use development. During the West
> > Broadway charette process, the consultants said that there was a
> significant
> > impediment to reaching the vision that the community saw for the area -
> we
> > did not have zoning that would allow the implementation of that vision.
> > Now we have that. Will West Broadway suddenly become the vision, with
> tree
> > lined streets with landscaped medians and lots of pedestrians and small
> > shops with apartments above with everyone smiling and happy and well
> > dressed? No, it will be a long evolutionary process, one that requires
> the
> > business community and the city government to continue to work together.
> The
> > city can't do it alone, but we can help the process. By having a plan and
> > providing tools with zoning and the MRA, we are helping the process
> along.
> >
> > So what can the city do to improve the economy in Missoula? Besides what
> > Geoff B. and Jim McGraff have already listed that we actually do, I
> believe
> > we keep on doing what we do so well - keep Missoula a wonderful place to
> > live and do business. That means worrying about the minutia of daily
> living:
> > dogs at large, bears in dumpsters, cars speeding in neighborhoods, bikes
> > "speeding" on sidewalks, cars not providing bikes a safe share of the
> > road, bikes stopping or not at stop signs, people driving while
> distracted
> > by cell phones, boulevard tree maintenance. Some people find these things
> a
> > threat to their safety and well-being, others feel that they have a right
> > to act how they personally feel is safe and/or appropriate, others feel
> that
> > these are silly common sense or manners things and that the city should
> stay
> > out of it. What a wonderful society we would be it we ALL lived by the
> > golden rule. Very few, if any, laws would be necessary. But look into
> your
> > hearts and your actions, the actions of your neighbors, and "that idiot
> down
> > the street" and realize that essentially all we do on council is to try
> to
> > protect your and your neighbor's quality of life in the City of Missoula.
> > There is at least one thing, probably many, that the city regulates (or
> > doesn't!) that you feel is absolutely necessary. Likewise, I'm sure there
> is
> > at least one thing, probably many, that you think is a complete waste of
> > time and energy - but that just happens to be something that someone else
> > feels is extremely important for them. So the city council spends a lot
> of
> > time deciding how we, with very limited resources, can keep Missoula a
> > wonderful place to live and work while it grows and evolves over the
> years.
> >
> > Thank you for your patience in my ruminating. It's obvious why I rarely
> > participate.
> >
> > Pam Walzer,
> > Missoula City Council
> > Alderwoman, Ward 2
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > -----Please delete extra content when replying to messages------
> >
> > Note: This list is NOT an official service of the City Of Missoula. But
> > posts to this list may be entered into the public record.
> > Subscribe or view archives at Missoulagov.org
> > List Serve hosting provided by www.CedarMountainSoftware.com<
> http://www.cedarmountainsoftware.com/>.
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> "Apathy is a vice."? Oscar Wilde
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://www.cmslists.com/pipermail/missoulagov/attachments/20091006/244130d5/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 19:31:39 -0600
> From: "David V. Gray" <hdgray at modwest.com>
> Subject: Re: [MissoulaGov] Committee Update 9-30-09 Bikes on Sidewalks
> To: "'amy casamassa'" <amytcas at gmail.com>,??? <missoulagov at cmslists.com>
> Message-ID: <010701ca46ed$eb3ac050$c1b040f0$@com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> God this is the such a beautiful email. Way to go Amy.
>
>
>
> David V. Gray
>
>
>
> From: missoulagov-bounces at cmslists.com
> [mailto:missoulagov-bounces at cmslists.com] On Behalf Of amy casamassa
> Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 1:30 PM
> To: missoulagov at cmslists.com
> Subject: Re: [MissoulaGov] Committee Update 9-30-09 Bikes on Sidewalks
>
>
>
> I completely agree with the statement below from kjerrim at missoula.com.? In
> addition, I think trying to paint cyclists as toddler-smashing,
> downtown-ruining, menaces to society is just plain silly.? Accidents do
> happen due to people not paying attention, not knowing the rules, or just
> plain not caring about others, but for the most part we live in a pretty
> tolerant place. I consider myself progressive, but I think a silly road to
> go down is believing that legislating tolerance and courteousness will
> really stop intolerance or discourteousness.? ?
>
>
> I appreciate what the BID is attempting to do for bikes from Broadway to
> the
> X's, but these ordinances that pertain to behavior have got to stop.? Bums
> and bikes are not the reason why downtowns are failing.? Are we really
> pretending that there is any truth to that?? You could strategically place
> proximity mines in front of Super Walmart and people would still fight to
> get in there.? We all know that a large reason downtowns are failing is
> because it costs considerably more to buy something from a small local
> business than it does to buy it from a box store.? Despite the fact that I
> know that, I make a conscious effort to buy locally.? There are many
> reasons
> why, not the least of which being that I love this town and the character
> that comes with it.? I find that the things I buy may cost more downtown,
> but are more special (and let's face it, less toxic) than things I can find
> in a box store.? Last year all the gifts I bought for Christmas came from
> stores downtown or south of the bridge on Higgins.? I am willing to spend
> more to keep businesses alive in Missoula.? I feel like Missoula isn't an
> over-regulated place and I think that means we trust our citizenry to make
> choices with the community in mind.? I understand that the BID and City
> Council are working towards making downtown a desirable and convenient
> place
> to shop, but I don't think the way to do that is to make downtown Missoula
> a
> whitewashed, cutsey-bootsie, over-regulated, Park City-esque mountain town.
> Which is what I see happening with these laws to stop people from doing
> things that a portion of the population finds annoying.? Not
> dangerous-annoying.? If that is the case, then those downtown businesses
> can
> kiss my dollars goodbye.
>
> Amy T. Cas
>
> On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 6:38 PM, <kjerrim at missoula.com> wrote:
>
> I think the whole point I am hearing raised is enough with all these
> ordinances pertaining to behavioral problems that some find annoying but
> others may not.
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://www.cmslists.com/pipermail/missoulagov/attachments/20091006/abfdfacb/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> -------Please delete extra content when replying to messages--------
> Note: This list is NOT an official service of the City Of Missoula. But
> posts to this list may be entered into the public record.
> Subscribe or view archives at Missoulagov.org
> List Serve hosting provided by www.CedarMountainSoftware.com.
>
> End of MissoulaGov Digest, Vol 44, Issue 7
> ******************************************
>
> _______________________________________________
> -----Please delete extra content when replying to messages------
>
> Note: This list is NOT an official service of the City Of Missoula. But
> posts to this list may be entered into the public record.
> Subscribe or view archives at Missoulagov.org
> List Serve hosting provided by www.CedarMountainSoftware.com.
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://www.cmslists.com/pipermail/missoulagov/attachments/20091007/a0bcaede/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Wed, 07 Oct 2009 19:05:00 -0600
> From: Russ Fletcher <russ at matr.net>
> Subject: Re: [MissoulaGov] Bikes on Sidewalks
> To: missoulagov at cmslists.com
> Message-ID: <4ACD3ABC.2080101 at matr.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
>
> This has been a great discussion. I thank all who've contributed.
> I hope you'll consider this as a way to continue and expand the dialogue:
>
> > *From Roundabouts and Buses to Trails and Bike Lanes: How are
> > Missoula?s Transportation Systems Changing and What are the Plans for
> > the Future?*
> >
> > *Special Date - Tuesday, October 13, 11:30 a.m. ? 1 p.m.*
> >
> > *Holiday Inn Downtown at the Park, 200 S. Pattee St.*
> >
> > * *
> >
> > Roundabouts landscaped with shrubs, flowers and park-like settings are
> > beginning to crop up around Missoula. New sidewalks, bike lanes,
> > trails and bus routes allow Missoulians to navigate city traffic
> > safely and efficiently. In the past several years, Missoula?s
> > transportation systems have gone through a number of changes. What is
> > on the horizon for further improvements to our transportation systems?
> > Is more stimulus money available to help with future projects? How can
> > citizens participate in future transportation plans and projects?
> > City Club Missoula?s October forum will look at these issues with a
> > panel of experts. Panelists include Ann Cundy, Office of Planning and
> > Grants Senior Transportation Planner; Steve King, Missoula Public
> > Works Director; and Nancy Wilson, Director of Association Students of
> > The University of Montana Office of Transportation.
> >
> > City Club Missoula forums are open to everyone; you do not need to be
> > a member to attend, however, reservations are required.
> >
> > Reservations for the October 13th, City Club Forum can be made by
> > e-mail to ccm at cityclubmissoula.org <mailto:ccm at cityclubmissoula.org>
> > or by calling 406-541-2489 by noon Friday, October 9th. Please
> > indicate if you want lunch ($11 for members, $16 for nonmembers) or
> > the no-lunch option of forum only for $5.
> >
> > Please cancel if necessary by the reservation deadline. Payment is
> > required for late cancellations and unclaimed reservations. We
> > encourage you to find a substitute to claim your reservation.
> >
> > For more information about City Club Missoula, visit
> > http://www.cityclubmissoula.org or call 541-CITY (2489).
> >
>
>
> Bob Giordano wrote:
> > I think it is critical to talk about safe cycling conditions on downtown
> > streets along with sidewalk discussions. At Free Cycles, we require a
> > bikewell safety and maintenance class before someone builds a free bike.
> > Well over 500 went thru the class last year. Some are homeless, some are
> > prelease from prison, many are students, many everyday people, and so on.
> > People generall do not want to ride on the sidewalk, but feel unsafe on
> > some arterials.
> >
> > That is one major reason MIST advocates for 6 (or 7) foot bike lanes, out
> > from car doors, maintained weekly, and connected (for arterial roads).
> > Trails and a good neighborhood network provide further options. In
> essence
> > we have 3 bike systems connecting into one network: neighborhoods,
> > arterials, trails...
> >
> >
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 21:59:45 -0600
> From: Jeremy Hood <thepoe at hotmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [MissoulaGov] Economy, Bikes, Sidewalks etc
> Cc: <missoulagov at cmslists.com>
> Message-ID: <COL122-W309621C24FA33170C341D7CCCC0 at phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>
> I guess I feel like I should respond to a few responses to me.
>
>
>
> Stickney -
>
>
>
> I would not say severe ties with the union; again I was not advocating that
> libertarian idea. However once again I want to point out that separating the
> dependencies of necessity with those that are supported through "cyclical"
> banes and boons in order to protect ourselves - on that aspect - is smart.
> There is no reason to break off all trade as all areas of the greater union
> do have things of great benefit to the rest. However why could we not be
> dependent in such a way that fluxuations cause horrible problems?
>
>
>
> I think still looking towards large corporations is a fatal mistake.
> Actually I know... Although it is not always fatal for us on the "receiving
> end" some one down the line has the problem. I appreciate the optimistic
> approach from you but well know it is nothing more than good vibrations
> ringing off some ideas. It is no secret that if you want change in things
> like climate you change the money flow to adjust for that. We all know to
> expect failure if the money is not there, behind it. Pam Walzer got this
> point when she recommended just choosing where to put your dollar. If the
> otherwise was true than we would have health care after voting someone in
> promoting health care but the money does not follow so we have an "attempt"
> fixed with self-kill notions going on politically. I am not interested in
> debating that, nor think it should be part of the list serve conversation
> but it does illustrate a point.
>
>
>
> Pam I may be wrong on this but if I am not mistaken Open Space is a bunch
> of volunteers like Ethel MacDonald.
>
>
>
> Anyways I am not sure anyone should care much about the concerns of someone
> thinking about economics that can afford satellite TV. I was also not
> implying that we give tax breaks to property owners or renters that are not
> in trouble if they can afford things like satellite TV. The idea is it would
> apply to owners of property places that rent to low income etc... There
> would be an application process. While the savings of $40 being passed on
> may not seem like much, to me they would be. $40 is a lot of food. Further
> more while I understand this is just brainstorming I would point out the
> possibility of income tax and business licensing etc, whatever could apply.
> Again I no expert in this field but if possibilities are there no matter how
> legally abstruse - but legal - they may be it could mean the difference
> between outside of Warden's or under a roof. (I understand income tax is a
> federal issue but I would be willing to bet there is a way to change
> classifications of money int
> ake. Once again this is applying to places already built to use what we
> have now. Spend money on them instead of more expensive new buildings that
> would not house as many people compared to funding existing housing)
>
>
>
> Also I think you might want to think of all the businesses that have
> disappeared; even when people do support local places they go under. Which
> courts Pam? If it is city and legitimate reasons are created I think its own
> courts can uphold them up. Perhaps that is very naive on the situation but I
> feel no personal attachment to Lowe's. It is hard to feel personal
> attachment to a place that does not allow its employees to talk and
> separates them thus, for super low wages.
>
>
>
> Bikes on the sidewalk
>
>
>
> John I am sorry to hear that you got hit. Although the sound in the e-mail
> seems to be that most people do not want to associate with them, nor feel
> they represent the majority of riders. This is like believing everyone has a
> chance to be a millionaire if you just try hard... We all know someone that
> made it but out of how many thousands of people we know, have met, or have
> personally laid eyes on?
>
>
>
> Now to what I feel is the most important thing with the addressing of laws,
> BID, quality of life and etc.
>
>
>
> The community is what we make it from how we choose to ride bikes, spend
> money, and support people/entities in extenuating circumstances. It is not
> what we ask for, not what we make laws for, or abusive situations we decide
> to accept.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection.
> http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/177141665/direct/01/
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://www.cmslists.com/pipermail/missoulagov/attachments/20091007/30687a5c/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 00:39:34 -0600
> From: Bob Jaffe <BJaffe at ci.missoula.mt.us>
> Subject: [MissoulaGov] Committee Update 10-7-09
> To: "missoulagov at cmslists.com" <missoulagov at cmslists.com>
> Message-ID:
> <
> 19A25C7C0336974B8751A91F13C7B8E1045458BE26 at Mailserver09.ci.missoula.mt.us>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Greetings,
>
> This morning we started with a brief item in public safety to adjust our
> garbage ordinance so it only applies within the city limits. There was a
> provision that made it apply for a few miles outside the city limits which
> created complications for the work that is going into revising the ordinance
> to address bear concerns.
>
> Then in conservation we approved a contract to study how to compost all the
> wood waste at the Champion site. There is something like a million yards of
> woodchips out there that are an impediment to building the riverfront park.
> We also have a problem in all of our parks that there is only about two
> inches of topsoil. So we commissioned a study to look into a way to convert
> all the wood chips into topsoil. The whole subject is pretty interesting. We
> veered into citizen compost collection, deer carcass composting, waste water
> sludge, partnering with Eko compost, the leaf collection program, and a few
> other things. Who knew we could get so excited about compost?
>
> In PAZ we appointed John Paoli to an alternate position on the historic
> preservation commission. It was one of the better interviews we have had in
> a while. I think he will be a great asset. We also had a couple of plat
> extensions for projects that were looking for more time. When they file
> final plat they have to put in all the infrastructure investments. We have
> seen a lot of projects lately that are wanting to put off that investment a
> little longer to see what happens in the housing market.
>
> In Public Works we revisited the issue with the new project on Nora street
> where the developer wants some public right of way to use as private
> parking. The committee was not really interested in giving that away. The
> idea was floated to just give them a permit to use the space for parking for
> some period of time. This appeared to be agreeable with everyone so we
> directed staff to work out the details. This way they get the dedicated
> parking to help bring in the retail businesses they need but we keep our
> options open for the future as this neighborhood continues to change.
>
> We also considered the safe routes to school grant which has attracted some
> controversy lately. We got the word that we could pull the bulb outs out of
> the project and apply the money to curb ramps without violating the grant
> application contract. So we approved it with the understanding that there
> may be some changes in the actual plans.
>
> Right now I am at the League of Cities and Towns annual meeting in
> wonderful Great Falls. We spent the evening in the Sip and Dip Lounge.
> Behind the bar there is a big window looking into a pool where they have
> mermaids swimming and there is this elderly lady who plays Johnny Cash tunes
> on an organ with a polka beat. I hear she has been doing it for forty years.
> It is pretty surreal. I recommend the place to anyone who finds themselves
> spending the night in Great Falls.
>
> But while I am here for the next couple of days I hope to speak to my
> counterparts from other Montana cities to find out how they do what they do.
> Every so often people bring up stuff about how great the other cities are.
> Like how Billings runs their whole planning department with three people.
> And how Bozeman has conquered the family definition conundrum. If people
> have things they would like me to ask the mayors/managers/councilpeople from
> around the state, please let me know.
>
> Thanks for your interest,
>
>
> Bob Jaffe
> Missoula City Council, Ward 3
> 1225 South 2nd West
> Missoula, MT 59801
> (406) 728-1052
>
>
> Messages and attachments sent to or from this e-mail account pertaining to
> City business may be considered public or private records depending on the
> message content. The City is often required by law to provide public records
> to individuals requesting them. The City is also required by law to protect
> private, confidential information. This message is intended for the use of
> the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient
> of this transmission, please notify the sender immediately, do not forward
> the message to anyone, and delete all copies. Thank you
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://www.cmslists.com/pipermail/missoulagov/attachments/20091008/10d43081/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 09:18:11 -0600
> From: "Ruth Link" <rlink at missoularealestate.com>
> Subject: [MissoulaGov] Foreclosure Information
> To: "Ruth Link" <rlink at missoularealestate.com>
> Message-ID: <003601ca482a$8cfb5bb0$a6f21310$@com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Hello,
>
>
>
> After the City Council meeting this past Monday, Bob Jaffe asked that I
> provide information on the foreclosures in our area. As we provide that
> information in the Housing Report, I contacted Sheila Lund at First
> Security
> to provide me with valid numbers. First, it's important to note that not
> all foreclosure notices turn into a foreclosure. Individuals may see a long
> list of notices, but unless you understand that many of those homeowners
> will be able to catch up on payments, it doesn't mean everything. Plus
> with
> the stimulus dollars, people are being provided more options to stay in
> their homes.
>
>
>
>
> Quarter
>
> Notice of Foreclosure
>
> Cancellations
>
> Net
>
>
> 08-1st
>
> 69
>
> 46
>
> 23
>
>
> 08-2nd
>
> 58
>
> 46
>
> 12
>
>
> 08-3rd
>
> 67
>
> 48
>
> 19
>
>
> 08-4th
>
> 119
>
> 46
>
> 73
>
>
> Yr End
>
> 313
>
> 186
>
> 127
>
>
>
> 09-1st
>
> 147
>
> 70
>
> 77
>
>
> 09-2nd
>
> 141
>
> 71
>
> 70
>
>
> 09-3rd
>
> 127
>
> 83
>
> 44
>
>
> YTD
>
> 415
>
> 224
>
> 191
>
>
> As you can clearly see in the graph above, when our nation's economy
> crashed
> in the 3rd Quarter of 08, the number of families that had difficulty paying
> their mortgage increased dramatically. If we continue the trend for 2009
> at
> assume that we'll have another 63 foreclosures in 4th quarter, that brings
> the number of foreclosures in our area to 254, clearly a significant jump
> from last year's 127. What needs to be clarified though is that although
> higher than usual, it only represents about 1% of our owner-occupied
> housing.
>
>
>
> I'm also hearing from my members that the "desirable" (in good condition)
> foreclosed properties are selling quickly for pretty close to market rate.
> We just aren't seeing a significant enough reduction in median price to
> increase affordability dramatically. (current market trends:
>
> http://www.missoularealestate.com/index.php/fuseaction/market.main/ID/0d95f2
> 40)
>
>
>
> Hope that helps. Let me know if you'd like more information!
>
>
>
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Ruth A. Link
>
> Public Affairs Director
>
> Missoula Organization of REALTORS
>
> 1610 S. 3rd Street W, Ste 201
>
> Missoula, MT 59801
>
> (P) 406.728.0560
>
>
>
> Please consider the environment before printing this email.
>
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://www.cmslists.com/pipermail/missoulagov/attachments/20091008/098f2a82/attachment-0001.htm
> >
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: not available
> Type: image/png
> Size: 22036 bytes
> Desc: not available
> URL: <
> http://www.cmslists.com/pipermail/missoulagov/attachments/20091008/098f2a82/attachment-0002.png
> >
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: not available
> Type: image/png
> Size: 19807 bytes
> Desc: not available
> URL: <
> http://www.cmslists.com/pipermail/missoulagov/attachments/20091008/098f2a82/attachment-0003.png
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> -------Please delete extra content when replying to messages--------
> Note: This list is NOT an official service of the City Of Missoula. But
> posts to this list may be entered into the public record.
> Subscribe or view archives at Missoulagov.org
> List Serve hosting provided by www.CedarMountainSoftware.com.
>
> End of MissoulaGov Digest, Vol 44, Issue 8
> ******************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.cmslists.com/pipermail/missoulagov/attachments/20091008/2b03989d/attachment.htm>
More information about the MissoulaGov
mailing list