WOW!! Did anyone else get the glossy brochure outlining the city administrations vision for development along Rt 33?
In my many years of wading through bullcrap put out by organizations of all kinds, I am not sure I?’ve ever seen anything that was so blatantly misleading. It talks of their ?“thoughts?”, ?“plans?” and ?“vision?” for development. It refers to their ?“excellent management?”.
What an opportunity!! This kind of stuff often backfires, especially when the public sentiment is against those who produce it. The positions taken in the brochure I received are very short on facts, and the facts will easily dispute their contentions. (read it, you?’ll see) By pointing out a few things, this costly effort can be turned on those who initiated it. Note the following:
?• Lou Postage spent my money to enhance the perception of his administration?’s success. That only works when you?’re popular, when you?’re not, it looks like you?’re wasting our money trying to make yourself popular. This ?“looks?” expensive, that won?’t sit well. I?’d contrast that with the efforts of the PATA, which have truth, but not quite the budget of the city material.
?• The brochure points to Rt 33, but doesn?’t mention that nothing has actually been done in terms of putting business there. It talks about their intention to pursue an industrial park in conjunction with Violet, but it fails to mention that this is just in the talking stages, and that other communities are already seeing the money from their cooperative efforts. It doesn?’t mention that they are only cooperating because they were forced. It also doesn?’t mention that the Pickerington just helped MI and Dominion build Fox Glen right where they say they want an industrial park. It talks of these ?“visions?” as ?“facts?”, when the likelihood they will happen is small.
?• It notes 400 businesses are located here, but fails to note that they are all service related, and that if there were 12000 people in the bowels of hell, there?’d be 400 service business locate there to ?“service?” them.
There?’s plenty more to shoot at here. They put this on paper, expensive paper at that, which leaves their statements open to analysis. Someone out there does a newsletter, if that was me, I?’d spend the next issue making ?“fun?” of the city?’s mistake here. By the way, is it legal to do something like this? I assume they are saying it didn?’t have political intentions, although that is exactly what it was about.
By PATA Supporter
In my many years of wading through bullcrap put out by organizations of all kinds, I am not sure I?’ve ever seen anything that was so blatantly misleading. It talks of their ?“thoughts?”, ?“plans?” and ?“vision?” for development. It refers to their ?“excellent management?”.
What an opportunity!! This kind of stuff often backfires, especially when the public sentiment is against those who produce it. The positions taken in the brochure I received are very short on facts, and the facts will easily dispute their contentions. (read it, you?’ll see) By pointing out a few things, this costly effort can be turned on those who initiated it. Note the following:
?• Lou Postage spent my money to enhance the perception of his administration?’s success. That only works when you?’re popular, when you?’re not, it looks like you?’re wasting our money trying to make yourself popular. This ?“looks?” expensive, that won?’t sit well. I?’d contrast that with the efforts of the PATA, which have truth, but not quite the budget of the city material.
?• The brochure points to Rt 33, but doesn?’t mention that nothing has actually been done in terms of putting business there. It talks about their intention to pursue an industrial park in conjunction with Violet, but it fails to mention that this is just in the talking stages, and that other communities are already seeing the money from their cooperative efforts. It doesn?’t mention that they are only cooperating because they were forced. It also doesn?’t mention that the Pickerington just helped MI and Dominion build Fox Glen right where they say they want an industrial park. It talks of these ?“visions?” as ?“facts?”, when the likelihood they will happen is small.
?• It notes 400 businesses are located here, but fails to note that they are all service related, and that if there were 12000 people in the bowels of hell, there?’d be 400 service business locate there to ?“service?” them.
There?’s plenty more to shoot at here. They put this on paper, expensive paper at that, which leaves their statements open to analysis. Someone out there does a newsletter, if that was me, I?’d spend the next issue making ?“fun?” of the city?’s mistake here. By the way, is it legal to do something like this? I assume they are saying it didn?’t have political intentions, although that is exactly what it was about.
By PATA Supporter