Brent Boyer: Navigating Steamboat 700
Thursday, February 4, 2010
Steamboat Springs — Perhaps the most important city election in a generation, the fate of the Steamboat 700 annexation falls into the hands of the registered voters who will cast mail-in ballots beginning the week of Feb. 15. The passion of those residents who support or oppose the development is visible in the yard signs, bumper stickers, mailers and campaign advertisements more prevalent by the day.
In recent weeks, I found myself grappling with the question of how to fairly represent the viewpoints of those residents who already have made up their minds on the annexation. Letters to the editor are a natural and appropriate course of action for readers who want to express their views to fellow community members. But it becomes a challenge when advocates on either side of the debate seek to use the opinion pages of the newspaper for letter-writing campaigns — in other words, coordinated efforts to fill the paper with pro- or anti-Steamboat 700 opinions.
The truth is, there’s not much value for readers when newspapers permit such letter campaigns. Instead of debating the issues, the letters often become part of a larger tit-for-tat, back-and-forth battle of who can appear to have the most community support for their viewpoint. I’m more interested in substantive debate about the issues, and I think readers — and voters — benefit when the debate takes that course.
Two weeks ago, I informed the spokesmen for the Let’s Vote and Good For Steamboat issue committees that we would not publish any letters from their memberships. Of course, that doesn’t mean there’s not value to each group’s interpretations of the annexation and its impact on Steamboat Springs and Routt County. So I proposed a series of point-counterpoint opinion pieces to be penned by representatives of both sides.
I’m pleased that the issue committees agreed to the proposal, and this Sunday will mark the first of five scheduled point-counterpoint pieces that will run side by side on the ViewPoints page. This week’s topic is “Traffic and Transportation.” Let’s Vote and Good For Steamboat will be given 700 to 750 words to make their cases for why Steamboat 700 is good or bad for our community relative to each of the five topic areas. And none of this is to say we won’t continue to weigh the merits of letter submissions from unaffiliated community members.
Our Steamboat 700 coverage won’t end there. Reporter Mike Lawrence will continue to examine issues related to the annexation. His articles have anchored the front page of Sunday’s Steamboat Pilot & Today newspaper for the past four weeks, and they will continue do so through the mail-in election. If you have any questions or suggestions for Steamboat 700 coverage, please contact Lawrence at 970-871-4233 or mlawrence@steamboatpilot.com.
We’re also putting together a voters guide to Steamboat 700 that will appear as a special supplement in the Feb. 17 Steamboat Today. Again, we’d love to hear from readers about what issues they’d like a better grasp on in order to make an informed decision.
We recognize the significance of this issue to Steamboat Springs and Routt County, and we’re going to continue to provide objective coverage on Steamboat 700. Send suggestions or thoughts to me at bboyer@steamboatpilot.com.
Comments
insbsdeep 3 years, 3 months ago
Nice shot at the top of page Brent. Next time it should be a little bigger. Don't you think a shot relating to 700 should be up there.
Seriously though, I would like to know more about the money 700 has pledged to the districts for improvements. It is basically a loan that will be paid back with property taxes right? Is it going to be repaid with city wide property taxes, or just the taxes and transfer fees collected within 700? Is 700 getting any interest on that money? I know the capital expenditures are set to be in stages, but what happens if 700 fails or is a bunch of empty roads, will the city owe 700 the money.
Brent Boyer 3 years, 3 months ago
insbsdeep: Unfortunately for you and me, our site administration setup doesn't allow the small photo referring to this story on our homepage to remain small once you click on the story itself. We're working on a fix. In the meantime, I'll spare you and others from being subjected to a near life-size picture of me.
Brent
grundy 3 years, 3 months ago
What??? The pilot already published an "Our View" article in support of Steamboat 700:
Our View: Council should approve Steamboat 700
It's a little late for unbiased news coverage. The paper has already exerted influence on behalf of the developer.
kathy foos 3 years, 3 months ago
I do think the little photo is better and that was such a fun chuckle I just had over that one,Thanks for the laugh inbsdeep and bboyer.
pitpoodle 3 years, 3 months ago
This is so much BS. You don't want readers to express their views because you are afraid that there will be too many opinions that contradict your paper's views. Really, any tit for tat or back and forth dialog from readers is a lot better than having your one point of view dominate. Seems to me it is called censorship. It looks like you want your viewpoint out and tight control of all others. You don't want substantive debate. You want your henchman, Mike Lawrence to only state your views which he has done to date. He hasn't examined any issues in depth because he has done no research on his own. If fact, some of the articles are so one-sided and disjointed with no opinions or information asked from the opposition that one wonders if this is actually journalism. Readers cannot make an informed decision on anything in your paper thus far. You and your paper are frauds.
kathy foos 3 years, 3 months ago
How can you say the newspaper doesnt want to veiw too many opinions?There is no shortage of information out there ,and you have the right to comment anytime,but not to tell the paper how to sway a vote.If all your asking for is more information to make a better decision,go for it now,some one will try to answer you Im sure.
AGM 3 years, 3 months ago
Yes, Brent, if you could act in a much more unbiased manner - such as the characteristics that PitPoodle exhibits - you'd be much more effective.
A sincere note - the Pilot & Today has done a nice job with the pros and the cons of this complex annexation in your recent articles. Those with terribly biased views or agendas, don't seem to ever hear or listen to the other side. They will never be pleased but are always the first to point fingers.
Scott Wedel 3 years, 3 months ago
Windle, Well, if you are right then it is presumably the type of people that SB 700 expects to occupy their affordable housing.
I wouldn't say that is deceptive, but educational.
So apparently SB 700 plans to provide affordable housing to the local family consisting of a bank executive and a real estate agent? Considering SB 700's costs, that is probably about right.
AGM 3 years, 3 months ago
The conspiracy theorists strike again. You people are amazing in your never-ending fear mongering.
The husband in the ad you are referring to is a cop. He drives around in a patrol car. His wife works for Smartwool.
I know it is hard to believe but there are at least two people in town with the same name. One of these people with the same name used to sell real estate for Marabou. She doesn't anymore. She is not in the ad.
So, you've got a cop married to a Smartwool employee. It took 30 seconds to google and find out some facts. I apologize for littering this board with facts.
insbsdeep 3 years, 3 months ago
I would like to hear what the truth is about the capital expenditures. Where does the money really come from. I don't think they are giving the city 50+ million no strings attached.
Is it good for steamboat now?
Who's going to buy these lots / homes when there are 2000 properties on the market now?
jk 3 years, 3 months ago
AGM
A sincere note - the Pilot & Today has done a nice job with the pros and the cons of this complex annexation in your recent articles.
More like they have done a nice job with the Pros of this annexation.
Tubes 3 years, 3 months ago
insbsdeep, the problem i see with one of your questions is that 700 isn't intended to be good for steamboat "now." this vote pertains only to the ANNEXATION and there will not suddenly be 2000 new homes sitting out there if it passes. it is (at least) a 20 year PHASED project that would be built only upon demand. in fact, it will probably be several years before you see even a single home on the property. but when the time comes (nope, i'm not one of those who thinks we're forever doomed), then we've got annexed land and a plan in place to handle and control the growth.
please put your long range planning/thinking cap on when analyzing this issue, and don't be like most of the anti's who can't see past easter. (let the, "then why are we voting on it now?" begin)
and no, i don't work for 700. it's really too bad that some have ONLY that to say in response to pro700 dialogue.
Requires free registration
Posting comments requires a free account and verification.
Or login with:
OpenID