Boy did this post ever take a hard right turn in a totally different direction...

Perhaps now that City residents throughout the County are paying more in property taxes to the County with the levy shift we should demand they plow our streets to earn that money?

It's not the County's responsibility to plow Montesano city streets. Perhaps an argument could be made for the County to plow around the Court House block...but I would think that would be about it.

A more effective approach would be to hire them to do it.

The city's streets are supposed to be the city's problem.

The way I see it there are three options
a) hire the county to do it.
b) buy the machinery and train everyone to run it... including the firemen (taxpayers ought to get something for those six-figure salaries).
c) get the heck out of the way while "guys with tractors" do it.

Thanks IKayak, I was being somewhat tongue in cheek there, trying to get something for the additional tax dollars I am sending to the County with no real identifiable benefit to me.

I did hear the City has ordered the plow attachment so perhaps this point is moot. I do agree with Lumberjack though that hiring the County would be the best option. I know the plow drove down Simpson until they crossed into the County then dropped the plow. Turned around and plowed until they reached the City limit and raised the plow and headed to another County Road. Just seems ridiculous, but it would be nice for the City to reach out to the County and some to an agreement to pay for the service, especially when the plows are driving through the various cities to reach County roads.

I guess in the end, asking for local governments to be proactive and work together may be asking too much.

I thought the county dropped the tax shift.?

And sharing gossip heard at a party with an intention of being hurtful and revealing information that could more easily let people know who I am than what I shared about you reveals who you are demonstrates several poor character traits. Which is why I won't share the name of the elected official with you.

I heard an unflattering opinion with my own ears which has proven veracious. That you think this opinion "could more easily" identify you only reinforces its veracity.

What you have done in this public message board thread is spread unflattering gossip about someone as fact, something which you did not witness first-hand and therefore do not know to be true.

You said more in that post than what you said about me. And that is what made me identifiable by association.

As for the rest, let's just give it a rest, shall we? We'll never agree and the public spat is downright silly. I apologize to everybody on the board who has had to endure it and for my part in continuing it.

You may now have the last word.

You revealed what was confided in private message.

I did not.

I didn't learn your identity or your "association" from your private messages, and I didn't post anything you confided in your private messages.

Things confided in private messages are just that - private - and should never be revealed in board posts without permission.

None of this negates the fact that Ken Estes is a lying douche bag who's soul will be rotting with Hel.

And it is a mark on your moral character that you defend someone such as Ken the douche bag Estes.