To the editor:

Same eco devo chapter, another of seemingly endless verses. That’s what I thought when I read the Jan. 31 Saturday Column. Where he sees ominous dots that need connecting, I see holes that need filling.

He laments the idea that the City Commission may “want to gain more control over economic development.” Scandalous! Revolutionary! Imagine, the city and/or county wanting more control over the direction of economic growth in our community than a private (but partially publicly funded) special interest group. There is a parallel with neighborhood organizations or the larger Lawrence Association of Neighborhoods. While these groups should be active participants in decisions that affect them, they are, at the end of the day, in an advisory/advocate role. It may be time that the Lawrence Chamber of Commerce should be in that same role. The chamber’s agenda on development is no more universal than LAN’s view on neighborhood issues.

Later in the column he bemoans the fact that the Lawrence-Douglas County Planning Commission rejected the 155-acre industrial park that the chamber had endorsed. Imagine the nerve of that body to listen to the arguments, both pro and con, and choose to uphold the professional staff’s recommendation, rather than the view of a purely partisan group.

In closing, he worries about “a well-organized group in Lawrence” controlling the future growth and development of Lawrence. Finally, something he and I agree on.

Phil Minkin,

Lawrence