In the pages below, about a year ago, last August, there was awareness, "Hey, we do not have an exit strategy." So, a year later what's the exit strategy? As best as I can tell, there is none. Muddle along. Hope. Not exactly a "strategy" but what seems to be the course of events. Put a new dress on the dummy, i.e., rename it. What's that worth? You tell me.
It is as if a bunch not adept or practiced in swimming jumped into the deep end of the pool and a year later are treading water no differently than previously, with no idea yet how to exit the pool. It is not a fine state of affairs. Below are the opening three pages of an August 25, 2009 five page set of Ramsey work session minutes. So, how have things today changed in any material way for the better [click each thumbnail to enlarge and read]:
Again, in the pages, the two key words I see: EXIT STRATEGY
----------------------------
Interestingly, the renaming thing that took up a large part of the recorded discussion, reminds me of the Shakespeare, "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet," or on the other far end of a continuum, calling it Shinola does not change what it is.
Between those extremes, I would suggest my view of a suitably appropriate name, "The Steffen Project." It tags the key mover in things with the situational responsibility at least, and that's an honest start toward, hopefully, something better.
AND NOW FOR SOMETHING DIFFERENT: In closing, it is interesting how the minutes from a bit less than a year ago on the final page presented above do a transition over to another topic, to a consideration of electrical inspection matters in Ramsey, and there's no indication of any expressed dissatisfaction with the quality of performance of the present inspector (by council member Look or anyone else), the minutes only saying in that regard that the then present arrangements, having the state inspection, (not named in minutes but Mr. Ted Hagfors in fact having the role), seemed to generate a consensus that no change was needed or advisable; Dehen stating, without contradiction in the official record, that "he felt the current electrical inspector does a good job." This excerpt [click to enlarge and read]:
Nobody then said peep about any complaints, or difficulties with Dehan's assessment of quality of job performance.
I don't believe much on any large scale has happened or changed since then, with the exception perhaps of only a single anecdotal instance of any substantial dissatisfaction or such, over the intervening year.
Keeping mostly everybody happy from whenever - years and years ago - up to last year and then some, seems to indicate a substantially solid record of electrical inspection job performance. To me at least.
Readers can form their own opinions, as always. It's a free country and we can think and assess situations and form judgments as we feel appropriate.
It's the American way. Freedom of thought and of expression.
One can only hope that the present council in revisiting the electrical inspection matter it recently left pending keeps its collective wits and judgment above reproach, when a record as clear as this exists.
Anything less would reflect badly on individuals, if any, changing their tune.
And any individual feeling an affront is encouraged to have a "come to Jesus awakening," i.e., turn the other cheek, all that, do unto others as, etc.