Local officials discuss Aigner lecture video
Community Alliance organizer: Community Alliance has 'fought growth forever'
Friday, July 24, 2009
Video
Steve Aigner's presentation introduction (40 seconds)
Community Alliance of the Yampa Valley organizer Steve Aigner introduces himself and talks about the organization at an April 20, 2009, presentation at Iowa State University.
Video
Steve Aigner's talk (1 hour, 2 minutes)
Steve Aigner's entire April 20, 2009, presentation at Iowa State University.
Steamboat Springs — The Community Alliance of the Yampa Valley has postponed its petition drive to make future annexations subject to a public vote, backing off from an ultimatum issued to City Council earlier this week.
The decision, though unrelated, comes amid increasing attention given to a video of an April presentation by the Community Alliance's organizer, Steve Aigner, to sociology colleagues and graduate students at Iowa State University. Aigner, 64, is a professor emeritus there. The presentation is titled "The Case of Steamboat Springs - Experiencing the Classroom."
In it, Aigner expresses his views on a variety of local issues - including local government, politics, growth, water rights and community values - from a sociological perspective. Intertwined with comments about his love for the Yampa Valley and thoughts about local traditions, Aigner talks about receiving "inside information" from a county elected official and says a mindset of Western "rugged individualism" can foster "total ignorance, I think, of how the collective depends upon everybody pitching together."
Growth has been a focus of the Community Alliance, and Aigner sheds light on the organization's mindset during his April presentation.
"The Community Alliance of the Yampa Valley has fought growth forever," Aigner said to his classroom audience. "Its primary reason to exist is to promote smart growth, at best, and no growth would be the preference for at least half the members."
On Tuesday, Aigner told the Steamboat Springs City Council that without immediate council action, "starting tomorrow, the Community Alliance will initiate a petition drive to amend the Home Rule Charter" to require public votes on future expansions of city limits. Aigner said Thursday, however, that the group has postponed petition efforts until after the council votes on the proposed Steamboat 700 project. That vote could occur Oct. 13.
Aigner said waiting allows the Community Alliance to coordinate petition efforts - the group also could try to put a vote about Steamboat 700 on the ballot.
"Our current plan is to wait and see : so we have more time to prepare and see how the city works it out with Steamboat 700," Aigner said Thursday.
Growing pains
Aigner said the Community Alliance has about 200 members. One-third to 40 percent of those, he said, are second-home owners with out-of-town addresses. The remaining members live in Steamboat or across the Yampa Valley. Its board consists of President Jack White, Vice President Rich Levy and Treasurer John Whittum, with an open secretary position. Aigner has served as the nonprofit organization's community organizer since early 2008. He moved to Steamboat Springs in December 2006.
Aigner said his April comment about growth could have stemmed in part from his work with the Vision 2030 project, an effort to gauge community values.
"I was probably thinking of the community surveys I've seen," Aigner said Thursday. "I don't actually know for sure what our membership believes, but I do know they prefer smart growth over growth, period, and I do know there are a number of people : who would be comfortable with Steamboat not changing at all. But I don't have any accurate numbers."
Routt County Commissioner Doug Monger, a Democrat, said the statement could hurt the nonprofit group. "My personal feeling here is that I think this a huge black eye for the Community Alliance," Monger said Thursday. "With Aigner coming out and saying : statements like 'we're against growth' : I guess I lost a little respect for the Community Alliance. And I guess that will mean that they've lost a lot of their broad-based support."
White said Thursday that the Community Alliance does not advocate a no-growth policy.
"All we want to do is try to make sure it's done right. It's not like we're out there trying to stop growth. That's kind of a wrong assumption, because that's never going to happen. We're going to get growth, and growth is good," White said. "We're here to represent the community as best as possible."
Monger, a fourth-generation Yampa Valley native, said he viewed Aigner's presentation Thursday.
"It just always kills me that the last guy off the pass thinks, 'Good thing I got here just in time to save it,'" Monger said. "None of us that have been here forever have any intention of ruining (the Yampa Valley) for ourselves."
Open government
Commissioner Diane Mitsch Bush, also a Democrat, defended herself Thursday when discussing statements Aigner made about learning inside information from Mitsch Bush.
"I've developed cozy relationships with lots of folks," Aigner said in the presentation, available for viewing on Steamboatpilot.com and Iowa State University's Department of Sociology Web site. "Like Diane will send me something that's going on inside the courthouse, her perspective on what's going on inside the courthouse with layoffs; she'll send me a record of what's going on, so if time comes for the Community Alliance to report to the public the internal politics of layoffs of county staff, I have Diane's report ahead of time and I can use that. I get inside information a lot of different ways."
"That statement is completely inaccurate," Mitsch Bush said Thursday. "I do not give out insider information in any way."
The county issued pay cuts to its employees in early April, when commissioners began discussing layoffs to reduce budget shortfalls. Commissioners laid off three employees in July.
Mitsch Bush added that she "would never talk about specific layoffs" and said Aigner misrepresented her.
"He made an inaccurate statement in a lecture at Iowa State University that's on a video, about what I did," she said. "I did not do that."
Aigner said Thursday that he never received anything from Mitsch Bush that was not a matter of public record and that he "may have been exaggerating" what he learned. "It's more likely that I was using that as an example of something that happened locally, : but I don't know that I actually received something," Aigner said. "I might have been using that euphemistically or as a possibility."
Rugged ground
Early in the April presentation, Aigner discussed his service on an advisory committee for a local watershed ordinance. City officials approved the ordinance in June 2007, citing a need to keep pollutants out of Steamboat's municipal water supply by regulating agricultural and construction-related activities in rural areas near city water sources. The ordinance drew initial criticism from rural landowners, who argued the proposed regulations were excessive and overlapped with existing state and federal regulations.
"One of the prevailing values I've found in western Colorado, maybe the whole West : is a distrust in government and regulation," Aigner said in his presentation. "And the other side of that is the extreme rugged individualism with total ignorance, I think, of how the collective depends upon everybody pitching together. They may have built log cabins together a hundred years ago, but : they forget that when they talk about rugged individualism."
Monger is a West Routt rancher who opposed the watershed ordinance - and still does - on grounds that it's "government without representation." He commented on Aigner's societal perspective Thursday.
"Well, I guess I'll have to disagree with that," Monger said. "This country was founded on rugged individuals. It's a perspective of the East and the West, I guess."
Aigner said he was speaking to an evolution on the watershed committee, where people came to realize the issue was about more than individual water rights and instead about what's best for the community.
"Once people start talking together, they learn from each other about different issues," he said. He added that he was speaking in an academic context and setting.
"It just means they haven't acquired the information yet. If I did use the word 'ignorant' : I was speaking to professors and we all know that when people take classes they come in with things to learn," Aigner said Thursday. "It doesn't mean that they are not intelligent or not smart or not able to learn, or redneck, it doesn't mean anything like that."
In his presentation, Aigner also discusses the 2007 City Council election, his perception of Routt County's "growth machine," and his thoughts on the failings of past city councils and leaders. Go to Steamboatpilot.com to watch the video.
Comments
steamboatsprings 3 years, 10 months ago
Paul, thank you for the correction. I was mistaken on the CA vs CF
Fred Duckels 3 years, 10 months ago
And Steve, trying to get Rob Douglas fired, fits right into this bag of tricks.
freerider 3 years, 10 months ago
ok well I lived here for 36 years and the planning in Routt County has been moronic to say the least...they have let every cowboy contracter with a hammer have there way here...I think Steve has a point . You may not agree with his tactic's but the bottom line is that we shouldn't let the planning commision have there way in Routt Couny anymore. They are fools with power and they need to be cut off at the knees..they don't represent the locals at all ...all Steve is really saying here is let the people of Routt county speak for themselves and put the growth policies to a vote...so what's wrong with that..??? sounds like a democracy to me...unless you fools would rather live under a bought and paid corporate facist dictatorship which is what we have now...I'm with you Steve...I'll support your petition for sure
Fred Duckels 3 years, 10 months ago
Steve, Methinks that you are putting lipstick on a pig here, having beliefs is one thing but the mafia tactics have to go.
Steve Lewis 3 years, 10 months ago
The complaining posters above prefer to take Steve Aigner's statement bragging to the Iowa audience as fact, and to take the years of statements by dozens of Community Alliance members at local meetings in Steamboat as lies and deceit.
Reality is what you choose it to be. Have a nice day.
steamboatsprings 3 years, 10 months ago
So sad but so telling at the same time. "a mindset of Western "rugged individualism" can foster "total ignorance"". It's nice of Steve to drop in to the Yampa Valley and Educate us ignorant, rugged individuals. If Steve would like to take a concrete action that matches his no growth goals he should move back home because his very presence is diametrically opposed to those same goals. This is of course unless his definition of smart growth is allowing only people smarter than us rugged individuals to move in an improve out lives by telling us what to do.
Steve is a nice guy but his speech is both amazingly honest in how it finally makes an honest statement about the Community Alliance's goals on growth, the reasons they are so much smarter than the rest of the valley and most importantly how they are downright arrogant about being better qualified to run this valley than the simple locals that have made Steamboat so special over more than 100 years. This is after in his case two years here in the valley but he seemed to know better the day he moved to Steamboat. With that sort of mindset it's clear that poor Steve still won't get it after 20 years.
steamboatsprings 3 years, 10 months ago
I just read the article for the third time and I am still amazed. Doug's comments are spot on. Steve thought he was "out of town" (thanks to the internet and excellent reporting by the Pilot he was not) and spoke honestly about the Community Alliance's stance. This has always been apparent from the true impact of their positions so it is nice that Steve said it in public for once.
His two step about inside information is simply incredible. He was very specific about how he got specific info early and then tried to say he was exaggerating or speaking euphemistically. How simple does he think that we are? 1 - there was no room to mis-interpret his comments. 2 - Steve is a very experienced professor who just told us how smart he is. Even average professors are wired to base their scholarly work on facts not euphemisms. This wasn't just some side conversation, this was a presentation at his college. He is starting to remind me of the former professor Ward Churchhill from CU.
The key point here is that Steve clearly thought none of the simple people of the Yampa Valley back home were listening. I still can't believe he said "total ignorance" I'll trust the ignorant Rugged Individuals like John Fetcher (only using Steve's words here, John is one of the smartest guys I have ever had the pleasure of knowing) to built a great community than some professor from Iowa who looks down on us with disdain any day. Those individuals built an amazing community with far more intelligence and common sense than Steve will ever appreciate.
I am proud to be a part of that community.
goremtn 3 years, 10 months ago
As Homer Simpson would say, "D'oh!" But seriously, what exactly is the issue here? Is it an issue that Aigner's work is kind of like protecting Steamboat Springs from outsiders when he, himself, and about 50% of the group's members are second homeowners and live somewhere else? That's not an issue....seems often that nearly everybody in Steamboat is from somewhere else, came for a visit, and decided never to leave. Everybody feels protective of this place. Is it because he has some really poor word choice when he describes what he does, such as cozy, insider, redneck, ignorant, and so on? That's not the issue....happens to all of us, we all say things we regret or would say differently if given another shot. Is it because he claims to get inside information from elected officials? Well, that kind of is an issue....makes me wonder if he would make the same claim about insider access on city council business? I think the issue here is the Community Alliance and if they are being honest or not. Saying they are for "smart growth" but also that they "have fought growth forever" is not about clumsy word choice or ignorance or exagerration or boasting....it is about talking out of both sides of your mouth depending on who youre talking to. Which is a tough place to stand when you are issuing ultimatums to your local elected officials.
Fred Duckels 3 years, 10 months ago
This effort by newcomers to take over the valley started decades ago, the first instance of note was killing the Catamount Ski area. This property was bought up after the permit was attained and turned into the trophy home situation that we have today. This probably houses many of the same elitists that we are saddled with today. Next they went after the La Farge gravel pit, with the same tactics that would make Rahm Emanuel proud. The same folks salt all our commissions, boards. and elected offices to provide elitist leadership, and wisdom for the natives. Sound like colonialism? Some of the more notable accomplishments from these visionaries include the Iron Horse Inn, attempting to sabotage the new county court location costing the county an extra $739,000, pushing affordable housing to make development more difficult, trying to sabotage the 700 development by any means necessary. This no growth posture would provide a haven for elitists, and our children will find work gardening, shoveling snow, handymen, working for local government, and other work available in a no growth area. There will be no dragons left to slay and our youth will need to look elsewhere. In addition we will build no more roads and force everyone onto public transportation. A jammed Lincoln Ave. will be the trump card to force the natives into submission. If they can control the traffic they believe that growth will be stymied. I started commenting over a year ago when I could not watch this corruption of our community any longer. Today is a good day to see this operation exposed. We need to watch this group and beware of their need to take over this valley that they love so much.
Fred Duckels 3 years, 10 months ago
I wonder if getting Rob Douglas fired is still high on their agenda?
steamboatsprings 3 years, 10 months ago
I can't wait to see what Rob thinks about this. It is amazing that they feel so much disdain for the simple people that built such an amazing community where they chose to live.
Chad James 3 years, 10 months ago
The blogs are surprisingly quiet on this one...where are all of the regulars?
bubba 3 years, 10 months ago
Chad, this one's just too easy.
Having watched the videos posted, I am wondering the name of the course he was lecturing in though? Interfering with development 101?
Also, I am somewhat startled at the revelation that this Community Alliance, which has a seat at the table in so many discussions, only has 200 members, and almost half of them don't even live here. Maybe I'm missing something, but isn't it a bit presumptuous for a group making up about 1% of the city's population to claim to be the voice of the community?
Paul Hughes 3 years, 10 months ago
Please, please don't confuse the Community Alliance with the Community Foundation, as one commenter has done. No connection. None.
Fred Duckels 3 years, 10 months ago
Freerider, One thing that you need to understand is that our commissions and elected positions are by desigh being dominated by the CAYV. It may not be the local flavor that you assume.
John Barrett 3 years, 10 months ago
Goremtn makes the point that a poor choice of words is something we all are all at risk for doing
Steve says the word ignorant was not intended, ok we forgive you Steve said that he is not sure what the members he organizes think, ok we ask the members of the Community Alliance to forgive their leader for not knoing their position Steve said he 'may have been exaggerating' ok we forgive you Steve said with respect to growth, that he did not have any accurate numbers from the organization he organizes, ok we ask the members of the Community Alliance to forgive their leader for not knowing how they vote on any given issue Steve said he doesn't know if he actually received anything of value from an elected official, ok we forgive you Steve defended his remark on inside information as a euphism or as a possibility:..is the word "possibility"poor choice of words when it alleges a public official gave you inside information? Possibly. Ok we forgive you Steve said he has "fought growth forever" probably a poor choice of words again, since he actually moved here, ok we forgive you Steve said certain things were said in an academic context, where apparently words have different meaning, so ok we forgive you During the end of the presentation Steve says "I don't talk this way in Steamboat" I guess you meant we could not understand the big words sociologists use, so we forgive you. Diane, Given Steve's assertion you provided inside information to him potentially damaging to you, your political career, and if this allegation is investigated potentially costing you and the tax payers of Routt County real money Diane, please forgive Steve Taxpayers please forgive Steve
Steve only one question Was your threat / ultimatum to city council on Tuesday night a possibility, the consensus of your members, a euphemism, or academic sociological speak we may not understand? We are confused, because you did not do as you said you were going to.
steamboatsprings 3 years, 10 months ago
Excellent Points John. One other point that this brings up is that it may be time for the Community Foundation to consider splitting out their political arm since those activities may not be tax deductible and may also detract from their charitable arm.
Their charitable arm has done many wonderful things for the Yampa Valley and serves as a great way for many small non-profits to raise money. I hope that this doesn't impact that side of the CF but think it will if they don't make some sort of formal split.
greenwash 3 years, 10 months ago
Ill start by saying im not a member of CAYV or WCC but I do know many natives to SBS and Colorado are members.I am a native(truly) not sure if Fred Duckles really is and we know about Rob Douglas backround(hes a big outsider in my view).Regardless, I dont think the majority would share Steves views.I also dont think Steve was hired for his beliefs,he was hired because knowone else applied for the position.Nobody.He was handed reigns,just because.Im sure the board wishes it had more control over Steves mouth but it doesnt. The CAYV has done some good things and some questionable but overall they seem to get the word out and create alot of debate which is good whether right or wrong.Im sure Steves son who happens to be one of the many realtors in town wishes his dad would have kept his thought to himself but oh well.Egos do crazy things.
You retired folks need to be more productive and pro active.
By the way Fred can you do anything about all that diesal smoke and smell you create on 129 every morning idling those old delapidated machines your running??Show some respect for your neighbors.
Lisa Kanov 3 years, 10 months ago
It is inevitable that Steamboat will grow and change. I don't think it is wise to put future annexations to the City on the ballot. The average person probably does not have the time to educate themselves regarding all the facts surrounding the proposals, whereas the City Council sits through hours of meetings regarding them. We should depend on our elected officials to make these decisions.
JLM 3 years, 10 months ago
Steve Aigner is just like every "no growth" proponent --- blandishments to your face and disdain behind your back because you are not smart enough to understand what he understands.
Sure he's only been here less than 2 years but he's smart, smart, smart.
He is a disingenuous weasel who thinks the folks are just hicks.
He should be tarred and feathered and given a rail ride out of town.
When anybody tells you that the no growth crowd is really in favor of "smart growth" just remember what Stevie Boy said when he was with all of his elitist academic pals, you rubes!
A truer example of betrayal and dishonesty could never be found! Thanks, Steve, for showing us all exactly who you really are, con man!
carlyle 3 years, 10 months ago
Fred Duckels can more than adequately defend himself. He grew up in Steamboat, played great basketball here over 50 years ago and went on to play college ball at Colorado State. He certainly qualifies as a long-term resident, and, far more importantly, actually knows something of what he speaks (unlike many other bloggers on this site).
Steve Lewis 3 years, 10 months ago
I just watched the Iowa video and I'd say Lawrence captured only the worst of it. There are also several compliments to local ranchers and water is discussed re: the Yampa Pumpback.
I'm sure it's a painful lesson for Steve. Days after he announces he's leading a petition drive to have a public vote on annexations, his classroom talk to social academics in Iowa lands on the front page of the Pilot. Turn the page and Rob Douglas is simultaneously advocating against Steve's petition.
The heat is on.
If you would prefer that no one ever question development or city council, I suppose Community Alliance, and Steve Aigner, are your eternal opponent, as JLM would offer. That's a reality few would subscribe to, I hope.
Steve can answer for himself, and for his words in Iowa. I believe he overstated several things, but even if Community Alliance is half no-growth and half smart growth, what in that disqualifies Steve or any of us from the discussion?
Steve Lewis 3 years, 10 months ago
The fact is, Community Alliance (CAYV) has acknowledged that no-growth would counterproductive to the affordability needed to maintain a great community. There simply is no example I know of where CAYV is advocating no-growth. None.
And we're no more homogeneous than most non-profits. There is a wide range of opinions. My experience is that Community Alliance is simply an array of people who care enough to attend meetings and ask questions. (CAYV) is the only organized group in this valley to engage in planning issues, from big box, to the UGB, to the annexations. If someone wants to get involved in how we grow, they gravitate to the one group available, CAYV.
John Barrett 3 years, 10 months ago
Mr Lewis,
You are obviously so close to the fire that you have completely missed the point of the outrage of this community over Aigner's lecture. You state, "The fact is, Community Alliance (CAYV) has acknowledged that no-growth would (be) counterproductive to the affordability needed to maintain a great community. There simply is no example I know of where CAYV is advocating no-growth. None."
To this, I reply you are correct in that the CAYV has never PUBLICLY stated that they are an advocate of no-growth. However, when the leader of the CAYV has the opportunity to speak freely outside the controlled confines of well-rehearsed and scripted speech that takes place within the Yampa Valley the truth is finally told. It is this hypocrisy and misrepresentation that has disgusted us all. Your organization stands up in the Yampa Valley and simply lies to us.
Please explain to us how on your web site and in public forums your organization states, "The Community Alliance has a long history of working on growth issues." This is quote from your website. Yet, in the sixth sentence of his lecture in the friendly confines of Iowa State University only 3 months ago, Aigner states, "The organization for which I now organize, the Community Alliance of the Yampa Valley, has fought growth forever."
I'm sorry, but I'm just presenting quotes here. Not opinions. Now I will offer a logical opinion. These two statements could not be more different. Perhaps a biased, disingenuous argument might be that the website offers very deceitfully crafted words and that they aren't so different from what came out of Mr. Aigner's mouth. I'd hate to try to defend that position.
For the first time, the voice of the Community Alliance has spoken the truth. It is fine for people to have different opinions in our society and we all should have a voice. All we ask is that you be honest. You want to fight growth forever go for it. You want to be no-growth, go for it. Just, be honest as to your intentions. Don't come to us ignorant log building folk preaching one message in public when the real message/mission of your organization is cloaked in coded disguise. Your organization has lied to all of us. Be a decent human being and admit it. Your organization has a mission to fight growth forever just admit it instead of slithering away from the facts.
Shame on you and your organization.
Fred Duckels 3 years, 10 months ago
I am not supporting the 700 because I like growth, actually I'm not very fond of any more growth than necessary to keep a viable economy. The thing that bothers me here, is the way this group is being treated. Being a rugged individualist I think that fair play is what our valley has been about, and that is why people move here. I have been involved the last couple years because I could no longer watch the underhanded takeover of our valley.Nothing in this tape is news to me, as I have been a constant canary in the mine, pointing out the cayv hypocricy. Mr. Aigner took taxpayer money for thirty years, and used it to indoctrinate our young to his view of utopia. The sad part is that seems to be the norm for academia. Unlike the east, the west has for the most part stood up against crime, corruption, and those of devious means,especially in a small town where rascals are identified and seem to always move on. Let's get back to the time when we mean what we say, and say what we mean, and a handshake means something.
JLM 3 years, 10 months ago
At the end of the day, one can only hope and believe that people are sincere and honest in their views. The problem with the two Steves is that they want us to believe their views are not what was represented in Aigner's lecture in Iowa. Huh?
I believe Steve Aigner's words as spoken by, well, Steve Aigner. He is an advocate for "no growth" and he is a powerful leader in an organization which follows his lead.
I have no problem with an honest "no growth" view of the world. Everybody is entitled to their view and I would listen carefully to that view to become informed and would respect its validity.
Progress is never created at the polar extremes and the future holds a bit of tempering which logically results in an informed or smart growth dynamic.
I am offended by weasels who say one thing locally, who pretend to be something they are not and whose own words provide the indictment for their intentions and truthfulness. I believe Steve Aigner completely --- he is a prevaricator extraordinaire!
An honest debate accomodates every view but it requires honest debaters!
We have been provided with an insight into a man's character and we should be informed and color our dealings accordingly. But, hey I believe the guy completely --- he is a "no growther"!
Fred Duckels 3 years, 10 months ago
Steve, Years ago the community had a live and let live atmosphere, public offices were passed around and each contributed their turn. We did not have a lot of controversy as matters were handled by those elected. Today we have your organization out front on shaping the community in your image. City council elections have become our superbowl and we have to fight to avoid a complete takeover. Most of our friends are busy making a living and raising a family,come home tired and hope that someone will look out for their interests. Your compatriots flood meetings and are very aggressive in influencing decision makers. They make it seem that surely anyone incurring their wrath will lose the next election. You folks are very up front to see that your agenda gets the needed attention. Now we have you calling for an election because you lost candidates on council and the 700 dicision will not be to your liking. You folks see this all as fair, maybe it is where you came from, but as a local it stinks. Instead of the wonderful organization you are describing I think that this produces a community far less desirable than the one that most of you were attracted to.
Steve Lewis 3 years, 10 months ago
Fred, it simply takes more patience than I have to converse with you. You have no interest in addressing reality. You literally make stuff up to support your view, and you are damn lazy about it too. As canaries in the mine go, you have no credibility, because this is typical of the reality you will not face:
7/22, Steve Lewis: "I have not been a proponent of the 700 annexation going to ballot, for some of Fred's reasons."
That was posted right below your own comment Fred a few days back. But yesterday, right up this page you write: "Steve, : Now we have you calling for an election because you lost candidates on council and the 700 decision will not be to your liking."
Whatever works for you Fred. Just keep making it up.
I will also ask you, for the 3rd time now, to stop insulting my character. You are not only willing to make stuff up to malign my character, you attribute to me the opposite of what I said. For heavens sakes Fred, I AGREED with you and your comments. But that doesn't fit at all with your reality that I am part of some misguided cult.
Fred Duckels 3 years, 10 months ago
Steve, I believe that Aigner stated that they intended to seek a vote, I know that you have worked earnestly but you folks need to all get on the same page. You have been diligent but many of the CA actions do not meet the same standards. I guess that I am lumping you into my frustrations and I don't mean it that way. You are a credit to our community.
Steve Lewis 3 years, 10 months ago
John Barrett, I will not be able to reconcile the website with Steve Aigner's comments. I regret that. I will abide by the website. I imagine you will adhere to what you found in Iowa. Steve Aigner has revised his Iowa statement in the article you read and you've already chosen to reject that. Fair enough in regard to Steve Aigner himself.
Community Alliance is another matter. Community Alliance (CAYV) does not seek no-growth.
John, you point to the Iowa video to state, "Your organization has lied to all of us. Be a decent human being and admit it. Your organization has a mission to fight growth forever just admit it instead of slithering away from the facts."
Tell me John, in founding your complaint on my organization, what is the depth of your facts file? An organizer's onetime bragging to a distant audience? More there, John? There are years of documented work, forums and positions CAYV has established here in the Yampa Valley where you live.
CAYV dates from 1999 I believe. Surely you can point to some example from the many CAYV positions taken over the years that you will represent are no-growth. Otherwise Steve Aigner's comments represent one man's aberration from a consistent pattern of behavior by many, and your complaint against my organization is weak at best.
Please back it up or apologize.
Steve Lewis 3 years, 10 months ago
Thank you for that Fred.
Fred Duckels 3 years, 10 months ago
Steve, After things settle down maybe it is time for communications with your group. Hopefully we are not as far apart as it seems. It would be good to hear others views.
exduffer 3 years, 10 months ago
Press: "mr Aigner, what do you think of the USFS approving the developement of a ski area on Storm Mountain. Ainger: "I don't know all the facts but I believe they acted stupidly"
YVCF 3 years, 10 months ago
To clarify on "steamboatsprings" comment from 3pm on the 24th, the Community Alliance of the Yampa Valley is a separate entity from the Yampa Valley Community Foundation. We have no connection.
Thank you,
Eliza Dodd Program Manager Yampa Valley Community Foundation
keith giglio 3 years, 10 months ago
If the very good idea of having folks sit down and talk about our common and general interest in the future of the Yampa Valley was the ultimate conclusion of this incident, it was a grand success.
For my part, I was first disappointed that the paper printed two "out of context" comments such that they painted a completely inaccurate assessment of Steve's lecture. If one takes the time to listen carefully to the lecture you will no doubt agree with most of what he has to say. I also believe it is important for us to recognize the particular audience of that video and the long standing relationship Steve has to that academic setting. Having sat through more graduate lectures than I can ever hope to recall, this one was amazingly benign toward what I know of our little community.
The most valuable reminder of this experience for me has been the importance of bringing the wide variety of individual interests to every table of discussion so we really know what is going on. Once we know why someone wants to do something, we can take the time to understand the full value of that change to the future of our community. A rush to judgement or decision seems to do no one much good.
JLM 3 years, 10 months ago
I am having a very difficult time understanding why Aigner's comments are such a problem. The old boy stated exactly where he stood having taken the time to prepare a lecture for an audience with which he was intimately familiar and comfortable. Good on him!
He was speaking from the heart. Did he expect his words to redound and echo back in provincial little SBS? Hmmm, well maybe not but that's the curse of the Internet, isn't it?
What is difficult to understand about that? It was neither inconsequential nor off the cuff. It was not a slip of the tongue. It was not a garbled missive. It was a well thought out statement to a bunch of kindred elitist spirits.
It was a well thought out statement of his core beliefs and his characterization of what he and the CAYV are all about. He is after all a leader of the organization.
To pretend that there has been a rush to judgment or to somehow imply that this is difficult to understand is simply disingenuous. People in SBS are simply not that stupid.
One may not like what it reveals about S Aigner or the CAYV but it is nonetheless quite revealing. In an unguarded and innocent manner, we have been informed and had a "teaching moment", no?
Perhaps Aigner will "calibrate" his views a bit differently in the future but the goose is loose on this subject. Maybe we can wrangle an invitation to the White House for a beer? LOL
It is what it is and deal w/ the implications and consequences.
Steve Lewis 3 years, 10 months ago
JLM, 1) One sentence in Iowa by Aigner, which he has revised in the above article. 2) 10 years of positions, including current positions, by CAYV.
From which would a reasonable man infer implications?
Steve Lewis 3 years, 10 months ago
Mr. Barrett?
You owe CAYV an apology.
Fred Duckels 3 years, 10 months ago
Rob Douglas spoke up for the natives and pointed out some shortcomings of CA surrogates. If CA is looking out for the communities best interest, why was it important to have Rob silenced? The best interests seem to be those that CA has deemed important. Most of the community is made of "totally ignorant" souls and they are not to be involved in matters reserved for elitists. I have a bad feeling about much of what I have observed.
keith giglio 3 years, 10 months ago
Fred,
I recommend that you replay the video and listen very carefully to the sentences surrounding Steve's use of the ignorance term. The word means: without knowledge. The full context of that section of his lecture refers to the observation that since people tend not to listen to each other and hear the variety of views on any particular subject it leaves the "community" without knowledge.
Please, if you would like to condemn someone for what they say, at least have the courtesy to understand what has been said. Then you can express your views with knowledge.
John Barrett 3 years, 10 months ago
Mr Lewis,
You have asked for an apology and I agree one is owed
The leader of the CA has been paid for 20 hrs a week for in excess of a year to know, study, and represent the CA as his job.
The leader of the CA went to great effort to build a presentation on his knowledge and what he has learned. The leader of the CA is in fact a noted academician, and no doubt has great research skills and is certainly skilled in the words he chooses to make his points.
You may assert I need to apologize to the CA, but I disagree.
Some, ( myself included ) think that if Mr Aigner represented the CA that poorly an apology is in order to the CA, but not from me.
You have offered an admonishment to let Mr. Aigner answer for himself. I have listened to the entire video. I feel no need to apologize for listening to everything he actually said both in Iowa and in response to the Pilot.
In one of the many poorly worded statements Steve's justification is; " I don't actually know for sure what our membership believes, but I do know they prefer smart growth over growth, period, and I do know there are a number of people : who would be comfortable with Steamboat not changing at all. But I don't have any accurate numbers."
I know of no organization where the leader of the organization would go on the road to make a presentation about his organization and NOT KNOW what his organization believed.
I repeat, shame on you and your organization for not holding him accountable.
Fred Duckels 3 years, 10 months ago
It seems that the natives are completely in over their heads here trying to understand what an elitist is actually saying. If they are to include everyone for input, I think the rhetoric will need to be simplified. Evidently I dont have the foggiest idea of what was said in this tape. On the other hand I did'nt actually need the tape to confirm my observations.
Steve Lewis 3 years, 10 months ago
Mr. Barrett, Again, as I said above, my beef with you is your claim against CAYV, the organization, as having deceived this community. A claim for which you have failed to have any evidence for. You have also chosen to ignore the PRIMARY REASON CAYV EXISTS, as stated in the video by Aigner: SMART GROWTH.
What you have: 1) One fragment of a sentence in Iowa by Aigner, which he has revised in the above article. His next sentence in the video rebuts you, so you ignore it in deference to your own agenda. 2) 10 years of positions, including current positions, by CAYV.
If the two contradict, from which would a reasonable man conclude what CAYV, the organization, is about?
John Barrett 3 years, 10 months ago
Mr. Lewis, Since all of us in Steamboat are not smart, what is the formal definition of Smart Growth by the CAYV?
Your "beef" and mine are different. Mine is with your leader and not the CAYV.
As to an agenda, I have NONE as I am not a member of the City Council, the County, a developer or CAYV.
In all of these posted comments - where is your leader or are you and a few other left to defend his words?
JLM 3 years, 10 months ago
Steve L ---
There is no necessity to infer anything. An inference suggests there is something left unsaid and therefore the conclusion must be reasoned to because the plain spoken words are not sufficiently clear to understand the message.
That is not the case here in l'affaire Aigner.
In this instance, no necessity to infer anything is required. Steve Aigner spoke with great clarity to an audience with whom he enjoyed a common background and complete ease of communication. He had ample opportunity to prepare his remarks and he delivered his remarks in a precise and knowing manner.
He meant what he said and he said what he meant.
It is only the echo of his works reverberating back to SBS which has created the whiff of awkwardness. It has effectively unmasked the poseur.
Frankly the dilemma is between the CAYV and its leadership. If the leadership does not accurately state the mission and objectives of the organization --- then you need new leadership.
If the leadership speaks with clarity and accuracy, then the conclusions are obvious.
The fact that the CAYV has not formally taken issue with its leadership or has not repudiated his statements speaks volumes --- no inference required there.
It is time for the CAYV and its leadership to stop peeing on SBS's leg and telling everybody it's raining!
Or alternatively the CAYV can get its act together and appoint leadership which accurately represents its membership rather than a personal agenda.
My opinion --- the CAYV is Steve Aigner and Steve Aigner is the CAYV. No changes will be forthcoming because Stevie Boy only spoke the truth, an awkward truth perhaps but the truth nonetheless.
Of course I could be wrong and the CAYV could be plotting its actions as we speak. Time will tell. I rather doubt it though.
steamboatsprings 3 years, 10 months ago
Spot on JLM, John and Fred. Steve was abundantly clear, made several other comments that showed his disdain for the simple folk of Routt County and was strongly supported by Jack White in the response from the CA. The truth is hardly ion question here unless of course you want to debate the meaning of what is is.
Steve Lewis 3 years, 10 months ago
Spot on?
This is now ridiculous. A storm over words long since repudiated by their author. No, it's worse than ridiculous. This is ugly. Like a pack after some obsolete scent. The man has already eaten his words in the local paper. What more do you want? The scent you enjoy comes from a man's sagging shoulders. Is this real for you?
Barrett, you would malign someone, by name, with this low standard?
JLM, do you understand? People with faces who walk the sidewalks and attend the meetings of their hometown, carry your thrown stains on their shoulder. Is this fun for you, from your invisible perch?
The man recanted the words you still vilify him for. And your burdens? None. You posture your crafty attacks without even managing a responsibility to know the meaning of your words:
in•fer 1. to conclude something on the basis of evidence or reasoning Encarta® World English Dictionary
The organizer: is NOT the leadership, and any professional posting here knows it. Are you too lazy to acknowledge the Sunday letter from CAYV President, wherein he named the CAYV board? Was Steve Aigner on it? Or do you simply not bother to reconcile your crafty "leadership" attacks with inconveniences like that.
Barrett would be the one who first challenged:
Be a decent human being.
JLM 3 years, 10 months ago
Steve, how passionately you rise in defense of your friend and compatriot. It is really moving; however, Stevie, boy, me thinks the laddie doth protest too much!
Steve Aigner now holds his position with the full knowledge of the CAYV Board of his views. It is no longer incidental or accidental. It is purposeful.
Again, not views which were based upon off the cuff comments given in a moment of whimsy but rather words carefully chosen for a formal presentation to his elitist academic colleagues and views which germinated and grew over decades of involvement. A peek into the man's very soul.
You would have us believe such core beliefs could be "recanted" like changing a woman's perfume? I think not nor does anyone with a brain in SBS.
The CAYV's continued support of this "betrayal" of its core principals, mission and objectives --- ummm, now really, folks --- speaks for itself.
res ipsa loquitur
No amount of histrionics is going to erase the brilliant clarity of his utterances and the continued public defense simply verifies what folks have come to know --- Steve Aigner is the CAYV and the CAYV is Steve Aigner --- in philosophy and action.
To "recant" one's statements is not the same thing as changing one's core principles. Caught in a prevarication, why would anyone believe him in his recantation?
I am reminded of Richard Nixon's famous utterance: "I am not a crook."
Recognize the plain truth of his words and deal with it. Live with the consequences.
Karen_Dixon 3 years, 10 months ago
Steve L.,
In an effort to maintain civil dialogue, and since you have identified yourself as speaking as a representative of the CAYV in this blog, I would like to offer an observation and make a request. It is no surprise that others outside of your organization would view Aigner's comments as wholly representative for 2 reasons: 1) during public comment at Planning Commission & City Council hearings, he is the only person, without exception, that speaks as the sole representative of Community Alliance (perhaps others within your organization frequently comment as private citizens, but not as representatives or affiliates of the CAYV) and 2) your meetings are not subject to open meeting laws, and your membership is not transparent; your chosen public voice and face is Aigner. Your message to the public is delivered exclusively through him, despite the fact that he is not "the Leadership."
It is difficult to mistake what he means in this video, since the entire lecture is framed in the context of "The Growth Machine", undeniably used in the pejorative sense. The question is whether or not he is actually representing the organization or merely pumping his own ego to an audience of similar beliefs about "the Growth Machine" (shaking heads....vertically). Both are plausible. The direction the CAYV takes at this juncture will likely be the measure of which is true.
The CAYV's mission statement is an admirable one. However, it is now tainted by Aigners assertion that the phrase "preserve the unique community character" is the organizations "leverage." If you are in fact an organization promoting Smart Growth as community area & sub-area plans call for, in representation of The Community vs. one promoting No Growth, I respectfully request some clarifications:
1) How does the CAYV define Smart Growth? 2) How does the CAYV define Community Character? 3) What does the CAYV believe is unique about the character of Steamboat Springs? 4) What does the CAYV believe is unique about the character of the Yampa Valley as a whole?
Fred Duckels 3 years, 10 months ago
We have a problem with CA here in the community, in my opinion. Their desire to keep alive the tradition of taking over a community by questionable political and propaganda tactics, is not acceptable. It would be nice if a word to the wise was sufficient, but it appears that a protracted war will be required to hold off this onslaught. Hopefully some day the whole community can share ideas and all have the same chance for consideration. Many ideas today are nixed by this group claiming that "that decision was made long ago". First we will need to get rid of the class distinction that some have decreed. Agenda driven surveys can be thrown into the trash as they only indicate the agenda of it's originators. Maybe we have too many chiefs and not enough indians?
Steve Lewis 3 years, 10 months ago
Thank you Karen, for offering a constructive path. I had decided that post was my last.
I understand your point about Steve Aigner as "wholly representative" of CAYV. He is by far the most visible voice in Centennial Hall. That's what he is paid to do. But you are mistaken that Steve has been the exclusive representative of CAYV. I expect any City Councilor will verify for you that Jack White is the CAYV President, and that he has addressed Council, as such, several times over the past year. Similarly for John Whittum, Board member. Both also could point to their published letters to the local paper. Ditto for Rich Levy, though a letter to the paper may not apply. It's been my experience that any CAYV letter presented by Steve Aigner in Centennial Hall was vetted by at least one of these 3 men.
A fair statement would be that Steve Aigner is a CAYV spokesman. I believe that still allows ground for your remaining observations.
I am not a CAYV spokesman and I have always posted my own beliefs here. Frequently enough I have defended a CAYV position, and occasionally stated that I am a member. But given, for instance, my recent posts that I am not a proponent of a charter amendment for public votes on annexations, which CAYV has just declared it is seeking, I obviously cannot claim that I represent CAYV interests in this blog.
I can suggest from my work with CAYV, that their likely answer to your 4 questions would be to point to the goals and policies of the Area Plans, WSSAP and SSCAP. In the planning realm that interests me, I can't recall a CAYV argument that wasn't hinged to some chapter or verse of those 2 plans.
If its helpful, here is the CAYV website: http://yampavalley.info/centers/natural_resources_%2526_environment/organizations/community_alliance_of_the_yampa_valley/pages/our_issues
I would try to further address the points of your 2nd and 3rd paragraphs, but if you need the official line, I won't waste your time.
Karen_Dixon 3 years, 10 months ago
Thank you Steve. Perhaps I am mistaken regarding Aigner being the SOLE voice of CAYV. From my impressions, he is the APPARENT sole voice, which is not technically the same. I also appreciate you clarifying that you are speaking for yourself here and representing your own beliefs. In your earlier posts, you referred to CAYV as "my organization" and defended it passionately and admirably. It is also stated somewhere on the CAYV website that you regularly monitor blogs on behalf of the group. It was for those reasons that I addressed you as a representative.
In the questions posed, I am not looking for CAYV's goals, or for the methodologies that the CAYV believes will achieve its goals. (That is a discussion for another day) When CAYV uses "preserving community character" as an argument against or in favor of a particular application or piece of legislation, it becomes imperative to understand what it means by "community character." Is it the outward appearance and image of the town, or is it the inner workings; the genuine authentic people of which the town is comprised? (by no means am I suggesting that is the extent of possible definitions) I am terribly disturbed by the thought of the CAYV using this phrase as "leverage" to fight a perceived Growth Machine. Aigner's statement suggests that they will use the phrase to mean any given thing at any given time to argue against the slightest amount of growth, even when that growth fits within Smart Growth ideology. I hope that I am wrong, which is why I am asking for clarification from the organization.... yes, formal clarification. Please make this request known to your Board.
Fred Duckels 3 years, 9 months ago
CA is attempting to throw Aigner under the bus, no honor among thieves, but the real character of this group is to takeover the community by whatever works. The present council is a real irritant to their agenda. Watch them try to run out the clock on 700, and find a less ignorant council with a vandetta against the private sector, to forward their views.
Fred Duckels 3 years, 9 months ago
Steve, While CA is researching I would like to know their participation in the county decision to require gravel operations to donate land or development rights, as tribute for permission to mine. This regulation requires the operator or land owner to set aside property for the public good, acre for acre, in excess of 10 acres on a permit. Permits 10 acres or less are not large enough to justify the expense. This was the big hurdle that La Farge found insurmountable. I went to extend the permits that I have, and found that it was hardly feasible. Could this be the result of CA pressuring the commissioners to stop pits and growth with one stone? Normally gravel extraction comes from farms or ranches that have been most important in preserving our quality of life. They have not sold out to developers, and this social engineering stunt appears to be a huge thank you for their efforts. I suspect that CA fingerprints are all over this, but I may be wrong. Certainly fits the no growth mantra.
Steve Lewis 3 years, 9 months ago
o.k., this blog is not a conduit to CAYV. Sorry Fred. Here's the webpage:
http://yampavalley.info/centers/natural_resources_%2526_environment/organizations/community_alliance_of_the_yampa_valley
shawant 3 years, 9 months ago
CAYV: Prof. Emeritus Aigner is a tar baby who is singlehandedly bringing you down. You can't control what he will say at his next lecture, but you can control whether he is still your mouthpiece. Take a bold stand and "no-growth" him.
Steve Lewis 3 years, 9 months ago
Karen, Thanks. I don't understand your reluctance to acknowledge Steve Aigner as less than the sole voice, given my post of the board members' statements. Perhaps you can explain.
"Growth Machine" which you insist is a disparaging context applied by Aigner, is not. Its a term now standard in the urban studies lexicon, made so by Molotch. See other post as to its obvious fit to Steve's topic.
The 2 biggest things I don't understand here: 1) Why you believe Aigner's Iowa overstatements define my organization, particularly with his Friday retractions . Will you require Community Alliance explain itself anew to you when another organizer steps in?
2) Does Community Alliance's description of itself matter in weighing the validity of the points it argues?
When Joe stands to apply an argument at Planning Commission, you would take his words to make your decision. You would also weigh the argument of his opponent. But I doubt you would weigh at all what you think of Joe's character. Would you weigh that in your decision Karen? Would it color at all, the other facts before you?
There's more I don't understand. You are terribly disturbed by the thought of the CAYV using community character as "leverage". Please illustrate your concern with some example. Maybe I've missed something. If we argue character and win, isn't because we were right on character. How does one abuse that?
In my example above, if a 3rd party were stand before you to reveal Joe's statement that he was using affordable housing as leverage to get approval, would you be disturbed at all?
I look forward to understanding your points.
I would have passed your question on to the CAYV board. But Fred showed me how that will be a bad idea. Please use the webpage.
Steve Lewis 3 years, 9 months ago
Molotch helped reverse the course of urban theory by pointing out that land parcels were not empty fields awaiting human action, but were associated with specific interests-commercial, sentimental, and psychological. Especially important in shaping cities were the real estate interests of those whose properties gain value when growth takes place. These actors make up what Molotch termed "the local growth machine" -- a term now standard in the urban studies lexicon. From this perspective, cities need to be studied (and compared) in terms of the organization, lobbying, manipulating, and structuring carried out by these actors. The outcome-the shape of cities and the distribution of their peoples-is thus not due to interpersonal market of geographic necessities, but to social actions, including opportunistic dealing.
Wikipedia - Molotch
Steve Lewis 3 years, 9 months ago
And I need to correct your post on a bookeeping matter, Karen. The website does not say I monitor blogs on behalf of the group. And I don't. I have on occasion at CAYV meetings raised an idea or argument I read here. That's it.
You got that by from what Aigner said in Iowa. You begin to see how counterproductive your focus on Iowa is.
JLM 3 years, 9 months ago
One can put whipped cream on a cow patty but it still won't turn into a birthday cake!
Steve Aigner's "retraction" is simply an acknowledgement that the words he uttered in Iowa were in complete contravention to the image he cultivates in SBS. They were awkward and uncomfortable because he was exposed for exactly the prevaricator he is. This is his fault and this nonsense of trying to get folks to disregard the obvious conclusion needs to stop.
A retraction does not "unring the bell" nor void the truth of the utterances. It is a desperate and cynical ploy to control the damage. Most importantly it is an insight into the soul of both the man and the organization with which he is associated.
Character counts for something and a man's words and deeds define his character.
It's time to stop trying to get the whipped cream to adhere to this two faced zealot and recognize this is not a birthday cake!
JLM 3 years, 9 months ago
Professor Aigner's utterances are so inconsequential that he has asked Iowa State to remove them from their website??? LOL, you can't make this stuff up, folks!
Karen_Dixon 3 years, 9 months ago
Steve L., You state: "... reluctance to acknowledge Steve Aigner as less than the sole voice" : I DID acknowledge this, but in technicality only. See answer to question #1 below for further explanation.
When Molotch's concept of the Growth Machine is taught in sociology classrooms, is it your contention that it is taught in a positive light?
1) You state: "Why you believe Aigner's Iowa overstatements define my organization..." Please don't put words in my mouth about what I believe or don't believe. In my first post, I offered constructive criticism regarding this question from an objective point of view. A person employed by an organization to speak on behalf of the organization executes and represents the board's collective and majority decisions and views. The membership, through the board they choose to represent them, support the collective decision even if a member has a minority opinion. If a member does have a minority opinion and can no longer support the overall organization's direction, he/she resigns their membership; likewise with the leadership or spokesperson. If he/she doesn't represent the board's direction and views, then he/she should not remain on the job. When Aigner prefaces comments with "I represent the CAYV," he speaks for the collective majority of the Board. The questions I posed relate specifically to Aigner's description of the CAYV's mission statement and the phrase "this is OUR leverage". A call for clarification is not out of line here.
2) You state: "Does Community Alliance's description of itself matter in weighing the validity of the points it argues?" I did not ask CA to describe itself. In fact, I specifically stated that I was NOT asking questions related to how it defines itself.
Steve or "Joe's" character is not in question here.
You state: "In my example above, if a 3rd party were stand before you to reveal Joe's statement that he was using affordable housing as leverage to get approval, would you be disturbed at all?" It is important to define terms like "community character" so that when this situation arises, we have a way to measure the claim. What disturbs me are ambiguities and the USE OF AN AMBIGUITY as leverage; in other words, to twist a term into meaning something it was never intended to mean in order to support an argument, and then twisting it another way to support a different argument. I am not claiming that CAYV does this, I am merely asking for clarification of a term, so that future claims can be measured.
As to Molotch's concept of the Growth Machine and his sentence "Especially important in shaping cities were the real estate interests of those whose properties gain value when growth takes place," a reasonable person might ask about the owners of properties which gain value when growth is stymied. Is there an industry standard term amongst Sociologists for that faction?
Scott Wedel 3 years, 9 months ago
The "growth machine" is recognized as a system of influences and consequences that that is stable and needs to be understood to understand the pattern of land uses in a city. It is first to be understood as something that exists. Whether it is good or bad is not part of the definition/observation that it exists (or is claimed to exist).
SB has a pretty long history of not annexing. City has refused to grow south despite several well financed or well connected attempts to do so. So the SB growth machine would note that projects within city limits are almost always improved while annexations are difficult.
So the term "growth machine" in the lecture title would indicate this was to be a scholarly discussion of social forces in SB as it relates to growth.
His lecture strayed from that.
Steve Lewis 3 years, 9 months ago
Karen, My apologies. I appreciate your taking the time for this conversation. Even more, you are applying your name behind your words which proves to provide better dialogue. Rather than "you believe", I should have written, "you seem to believe" that Aigner's Iowa overstatements define my organization. I think it's obvious where I stand: Iowa is irrelevant in defining my organization.
I know many people will read the Lawrence article and think less of us. (I think far fewer people would have the same reaction to the video, so I'm glad its still on the Pilot website.) The Lawrence article will impact CAYV internally we are trying to learn from this unpleasant, but educational experience. Will the Iowa video have any affect on the arguments we make? No. Any argument made in Centennial Hall succeeds or fails on its own merits; they do not succeed based on who is speaking.
Steve Lewis 3 years, 9 months ago
Getting to your points: 1). I'm not sure what clarification you are calling for. If it's useful, Steve Aigner at the podium usually prefaces his statements with "I am the organizer for CAYV".
I agree with you, "A person employed by an organization to speak on behalf of the organization executes and represents the board's collective and majority decisions and views." I believe Steve has done this faithfully. Steve went to Iowa on his own time, and was representing himself, not CAYV. Some latitude from the "company line" is reasonable. No?
The question I asked in 1) is fair: Will you require Community Alliance explain itself anew when another organizer steps in?
2) I'm sorry Karen if I muddied the water; this question was not dependent on your post. It was my question to you: "Does Community Alliance's description of itself matter in weighing the validity of the points it argues?"
My last question, 3) I guess, "In my example above, if a 3rd party were stand before you to reveal Joe's statement that he was using affordable housing as leverage to get approval, would you be disturbed at all?"
Your reply, was a question to me (my words, not yours): I should define "affordable housing", or "community character" before you can judge whether I am twisting my definition according to the argument I want to win.
My response to your question: Community character is the mix of social, architectural, geographical, industrial, natural, ethical, (etc:) traits marking and individualizing our community.
Which is, of course, in the eye of the beholder. One makes an argument that "X" either improves or diminishes our community character. City Council or Planning Commission either agrees with the argument or not. Neither our CDC nor the Area Plan has a definition of community character. The community character argument definitely was made, as leverage, by many folks outside CAYV and on a regular basis when I sat on planning commission. To my knowledge, this would be the first time anyone thought to ask for a definition. In my opinion, its like public benefit, one has to see the proposal to know what realm they are addressing.
I do not agree with Steve Aigner that community character is our lever. There are too many complex matters (see our website) that we have addressed. Community character would be the whole of none of them. I am clueless as to how one abuses or twists an argument like community character. You either succeed with an argument or not. But you might give some example?
Fred Duckels 3 years, 9 months ago
Is it normal for the "organizer" to issue ultimatums to city council? This does not sound like the right role, unless he drew the short straw.
steamboatsprings 3 years, 9 months ago
If Iowa is not relevant why does Steve Lewis spend so much of his time speaking to what happened in Iowa. He clearly thinks it is. It is immensely relevant because it speaks to the tactics and the level of trust that we can put into the positions, reasoning and arguments that the CAYV puts forth for public discussion. The video has probably been the least revealing portion of the the whole affair given the much more revealing quotes and naive defenses that have been presented by the CAYV since then. Each was a considered response and was thus even more revealing.
Karen_Dixon 3 years, 9 months ago
Steve, 1) Any organization should be forthright about it's purpose for being, regardless of who the organizer is. Any person speaking on behalf of or with regards to that organization is assumed to wholly represent that organization and it's philosophy. If and when a disparity occurs, questions arise regarding forthrightness and purpose. This holds true for any leader, organizer, or spokesperson at any time.
2) All legislation has consequences. When considering a piece of legislation, one tries to ensure that all consequences are intended. Often times, not everything is anticipated, and unintended consequences arise. When an organization is forthright about its philosophy, and is arguing for or against a piece of legislation, it can be genuine in representing the intent of the legislation and what it hopes to accomplish. In this way, a level of trust can be established between petitioners and policymakers. If on the other hand, an organization has a hidden agenda, it may represent the consequences as "x", knowing that they will ultimately be "y", and hoping that the policymakers don't think to consider "y" when vetting the legislation. What will later appear as an unintended consequence, accomplishing perhaps the exact opposite of stated goals, was actually intended by the organization in the first place. In answer to your question, being above board and honest in representation is what matters.
3) Thank you for your answer. I do not disagree. The fact that we have made policies and goals around nebulous ideas might be at the root of general conflict in this community. Ironically, this adds another layer to "community character", good or bad. :-)
As to your request for an example.... I haven't been keeping tabs of getting hoodwinked, as I had no reason to suspect it. However, I do have a possible example that came to light in our most recent PC hearing.... legislation that took place during your tenure, prior to mine. I'd be happy to discuss it over coffee. 819-5281
Steve Lewis 3 years, 9 months ago
Thanks Karen, 1) I completely agree. Obviously, in Iowa Steve Aigner was not speaking on behalf of CAYV. 2) I completely agree. I believe CAYV has been forthright about its philosophy. We have years of record here. You have not gone there, but I will repeat to others: you need more proof than Aigner speaking on his own time, in another setting, to make a claim that CAYV has been, or will be, dishonest to this valley.
Your complaint I believe is: Community Alliance could argue for affordable housing and help establish an ordinance to that end. But there is a possibility that Community Alliance really did not care about affordable housing. They really just wanted to slow growth.
I keep submitting that the only result possible is a result the community has agreed with. There is a wolf in there? Let me try another approach. If we have an even further agenda, does it make sense for a CAYV member like me, highly visible in this forum as I have been, to say I'm not a proponent of the charter amendment?
3) I completely agree.
A coffee sounds great. I'll call you after this Yampa trip. You've helped me see your points and have been patient. Thanks for a rational discussion.
Steve Lewis 3 years, 9 months ago
I have a lot of respect for Steve Aigner. Community Alliance is just one effort beside several volunteer endeavors Steve has invested in this community. I allow the Iowa video is part of who Steve is, but by no means is that all of his story.
I will accept criticsm that I support Steve because I am a fellow CAYV compatriot. I simply offer that when I felt this blog was too harsh, I've also defended Fred Duckels and Loui Antonucci.
Have a nice day.
Scott Wedel 3 years, 9 months ago
Seems to me the part of Steve Aigner that can be seen from the video is a horrible fact checker (bad facts on taxes, annexations and so on), takes pride in deceptively presenting survey information ("smart growth"), and takes credit for anything good that happened here.
I think he should go over that lecture line by line with Steve Lewis, Scott Ford and other local experts, to create a scholarly lecture on SB and the Growth Machine with a supporting bibliography. Then present that lecture at CMC and in Iowa.
If Professor Aigner and the CA wants to learn what is unfair, just wait until the SB 700 annexation is on the ballot. Any campaign consultant with a working brain cell would make Professor Aigner and his comments as the centerpiece of the argument as why the opposition are unreasonable liars ignorant of local history and basic economics.
I am not generally opposed to the CA. But if the CA is going to defend him then they will be racing to the fringe. He needs to take a sabbatical and spend a few months learning and listening while staying out of politics.
Steve Lewis 3 years, 9 months ago
Scott, On what do you found your use of the word "liars"?
Steve Lewis 3 years, 9 months ago
Steve Aigner made incorrect representations that he has in large part corrected. Perhaps you have some interest in correcting him further?
I'll be interested in what Steve did say that deserved your harsh words.
But in particular, here you have used the word in the plural.
Scott Wedel 3 years, 9 months ago
Are you seriously asking me how a campaign consultant could portray Aigner and associates as liars?
Doesn't that question imply that you accept that Aigner and CA will be portrayed as being unreasonable and ignorant of local history and basic economics? You accept, but draw the line at "liars"? So be it.
How would a campaign consultant portray Aigner and the CA as liars. Hmm, take Aigner's false statements directly related to his work at CA and take fellow CA officer statements to show guilt not just by association, but by supporting him.
JLM 3 years, 9 months ago
The simple, unvarnished truth of the matter is that Steve Aigner is a liar. His words and his words alone prove this simple and undeniable point. Deal with it!
steamboatsprings 3 years, 9 months ago
Professor Aigner must know how to check his facts after so long in his chosen profession. This confirms that he knew what he was saying about the CA and made statements that he knew were incorrect when he hoped they would further his cause. It's ok when he does it because he and the CA know what is best for the unwashed masses in Steamboat even though he just came over the pass.
Clearsky 3 years, 9 months ago
All you have to do is take a look at Steamboat and see what it has become and what it will become, then thank people like Aigner for risking for what is right. The things we should have done- Continuous sidewalks, greenbelts, unobstructive views of the mountain. Just take a walk around and you can see where we went wrong. and there is more to come. We will have to change the name of the ski area to Canyonland Park? after they put in 109 foot tall mammoths.
JLM 3 years, 9 months ago
Yeah, sure if the cause is good enough, then it is OK to lie like a dog, right?
If the cause is honorable enough, then it is OK to breach one's honor, right?
If the cause is important enough, then it is OK to fool the folks, right?
Cause, the end --- always the freakin' good, honorable, important end --- is always justification for any low life conduct necessary to achieve the freakin' end!
This matter is not about the merits of the argument but rather the fact that the CAYV and its handmaiden are big fat liars.
Their miserable, craven conduct invalidates the wisdom and persuasiveness of their view.
A fair debate with any and all views represented is a good thing.
Being a big fat liar? Not so good!
Clearsky 3 years, 9 months ago
JLM, What the %&*( are you talking about? The issue is uncontrolled "crappy" growth. Look what is being left behind for our children. Let me guess, you will just move on to the next place to make your $. Listen to the message of these people who stand up and try to help the transient leaders make the best decision. Try not to get hung up on a misappropriated statement. And if you have a problem with "liars" do not listen to Rush and friends. He'll have you foaming from the mouth with rage.
JLM 3 years, 9 months ago
Clear, babe, get a grip. Your head is going to explode!
This subject has nothing to do w/ Rush Limbaugh or any other national political issue. Hell, it's not even about politics.
This has to do with a local organization whose "go to guy" is a big fat liar and and therefore its entire public persona is suspect.
Growth will be most successful when the function is market driven, the design is of high quality, the materials are appropriate and the scale is consistent with its surroundings. Not every building is a classic but every building can be good.
Good design is good business. Good business makes money. Nothing wrong with making money, mon ami.
The "no growth" nihilists want to oppose everything --- they want nothing --- good, bad, indifferent. To maintain the status quo of functionally obsolete design simply in the face of a "no growth" philosophy is not very smart.
And, clear, babe, you are one smart cookie! Well, when you stay on your meds anyway!
Clearsky 3 years, 9 months ago
JLM, Again it is weird for one man to call another babe unless of course you see other men that way. Stick to thoughtful discussion and you will have less chance of embarrassing yourself or maybe you are letting your true colors fly.
JLM 3 years, 9 months ago
Clear, babe, a bit of latence showing through? Calm down, rover. You're OK, folks just like you for who you are! Silly goose! LOL
steamboatsprings 3 years, 9 months ago
Clearsky, if your goals are what you state you should be even more upset than the posters than criticized Steve Aigner because his comments (along with those that followed from the CAYV) and lack of regard for the citizens of our community have substantially diminished how seriously any of their positions and arguments will be taken for a long time.
His conduct and that of the CAYV is the biggest issue here. There will always be healthy debate on the best direction for Steamboat and that makes for a better community. I strongly believe that gives as a better result. Calling your community ignorant and unqualified to understand what is best for them does not earn you much of a place in that community nor any respect.
Clearsky 3 years, 9 months ago
JLM, Your probably OK too. Just undereducated, mean, careless, predjudiced, hateful, demeaning and did I say undereducated. Did you actually graduate from 5th grade yet?
JLM 3 years, 9 months ago
Clear, babe, what wonderful repartee and cleverness. LOL
You are truly a great wit --- well, half of one anyway.
Actually I was blessed with a wonderful education --- far more than I deserved and I want to thank you personally for it because you paid for it. Both my undergrad degree and grad degree. GI Bill, don't you know. Hell, Ivy League grad school to boot. You are first class if nothing else, clear.
So, clear, babe, a belated thank you to YOU, my dear friend, for all you have done for me. Thanks!
Uhhh, clear, babe, you might want to double-check the spelling of "predjudice" --- us uneducated Ivy League types have been spelling it a bit differently but what the heck, we are all a bit "undereducated" ---- hahahahaha --- aren't we?
You silly goose!
If it were not so ungentlemanly, one would be tempted to point out a chap would be a bit of a jerk to take another fellow's education to task and not be able to spell the message correctly. But I am a gentleman, clear.
Clearsky 3 years, 9 months ago
I you are so living in fantasy land. Calling guys babe. Pretending to be educated.. Oh my You probably are a Hollywood producer and a movie star.
Karen_Dixon 3 years, 9 months ago
JLM, Clearsky:
SERIOUSLY? Please exchange phone numbers and get off the air. This is the EXACT reason why most people in this community don't bother with this blog. You turn what could be a productive, intelligent, educational forum for debate and civil dialogue about critical issues facing this community into a juvenile panty-fight.
Requires free registration
Posting comments requires a free account and verification.
Or login with:
OpenID