All content, of both the original and this blog, is written from my point of view and is my opinion. I believe it to be accurate at the time it is written. ~ Kyle Prast, Brookfield resident since 1986

Thursday, February 01, 2007

Faulty logic: Since when does time spent in committee equal a valid plan? (Revised)

Do you think the length of time spent in committee determines a proposal’s viability? I don’t think so: A flawed concept is still just as flawed, even if it takes a year or more in committee. A study based on faulty data or reasoning is still just as wrong, even if it takes a committee years to reach a conclusion! There is no E for effort in my book.

According to Alderman Gary Mahkorn’s comments at the last HRPS meeting, he would disagree with me. Seems he would give the E for effort and add an A for approval too. Twice during the meeting he commended the Task Force for their time and effort. And yes, they should be commended—I imagine the Task Force made a huge sacrifice of time to study the issues.

But when Mahkorn drew the conclusion that by virtue of their sacrifice of time and effort it was a good plan, we should almost give them Carte Blanche as to what they want the city to do, that shocked me. Basing approval on the amount of time and effort put into studying this issue instead of the validity of their proposal? (I found in my notes that another time when speaking about the Task Force working very hard he backpedaled a bit to say, while they shouldn't get carte blanche, he agreed with their findings.)

Both aldermen Balzer and Franz questioned moving station #3 from its present location and for good reason: it covers the largest and most dense area of the south side. It is already in a great location to service the majority of households on the south side, and it is in close proximity to the “hot zone”: the commercial areas of Brookfield Square, hotels, and freeway. Yet Mahkorn kept trying to tie keeping that superior location to our cooperation with the Town of Brookfield’s servicing the Weston Hills subdivision, as if that Moorland location was only good if we had the Town servicing Weston Hills to the west. The truth of the matter is that ONE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE OTHER!

Look at the map. Nearly all of the higher density areas of households are covered by the current Moorland station. The travel times look to be less than 4 minutes for the majority of those homes—even the ones in the west. (The distances are about 2 – 3 miles.) Now look at the new proposed location on Calhoun and Greenfield. It shows the travel time to the north east side of district 7 as being 6 minutes and 50 seconds! The number of households NOT in the 4 minute circle in the present Moorland location are far less than the amount NOT in the circle in the new location on Calhoun. The move west for station 3 is illogical and unethical regardless of any cooperation with the Town or not.

Right now we are contemplating changes to both fire stations. This presents a unique opportunity to rethink the whole fire/EMS scenario. Let’s not blindly jump at a change in relocation just because a committee says it is a good idea; there are problems with both relocation sites.

Look at the maps and think about it for yourself. There is no room for Carte Blanche here. The future of our city and the safety of our residents is at stake. Once the moves are made, we will be locked into this poor decision for decades. I appreciate the effort the Task Force made, but that is no reason for E for effort or A for approval.

Coming next: A creative EMS/Fire solution the committee did not study


Post a Comment

<< Home