[Vision2020] Outdoor lights
Donovan Arnold
donovanarnold at hotmail.com
Mon Jan 31 22:37:06 PST 2005
Jim,
How efficient a light bulb is depends greatly on the bulb you are using.
The information that you gave is old and off a government website. And that
is a rounded number that is calculating for all energy light bulbs.. The
EXACT light bulbs that I use are about 9-13 times more efficient. I use a 9
watt light bulb that produces the same lighting as a 60 watt. If I could, I
would show you the package, but I cannot so you will have to settle by
visiting this site and seeing for yourself and verify the information.
http://www.lightsofamerica.com/light-cfl.htm
Or not, I really don't care. I know my information is correct.
Take care,
DJA
>From: "Jim Meyer" <m1e2y3e4 at moscow.com>
>To: <vision2020 at moscow.com>
>Subject: [Vision2020] Outdoor lights
>Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 07:24:00 -0800
>
>All,
>Part of living in a community is being at least a little tolerant of your
>neighbors. That means we all should exhibit some courtesy to one another.
>For instance, if my neighbors have a party until 2:00 in the morning and
>there was more light and noise than I would like, then I would let it go
>unless the light and noise was beyond merely irritating and crossed over to
>being extreme. In a similar manner, I hope that if I had a broken car, and
>could only fix it at night when I wasn't working, and I used two 150 watt
>halogen lights to see what I was doing, then I hope my neighbors would be
>tolerant of that as well.
>
>Jeff-- I didn't see any differentiation between stationary and movable
>lights in your law excerpt. That in mind, I can see a big difference
>between
>a 150 watt halogen permanently mounted on a garage, and my temporary usage
>of a mobile halogen fixture totaling 300 watts that I might use to fix my
>car. Like you, I don't think it should be illegal to fix my car. However, I
>don't mind having my permanent fixtures be somewhat restricted.
>
>Donovan--You have some points but you need to get your facts straight,
>because truly wrong facts tend to dilute your message.
>The following is a comparison between the wattage of commonly available
>incandescent lamps and the wattage of a CFL that will provide similar light
>levels:
>
>25 Watt Incandescent = 5 Watt CFL
>(http://www.eere.energy.gov/consumerinfo/factsheets/ef2.html)
>50 = 9
>60 = 15
>75 = 20
>100 = 25
>120 = 28
>150 = 39
>
>Donovan, your comment that ".....In fact, if you had one soft light energy
>saving bulb at
>60 watts it would be so bright (650 watts of an incandescent) you would.."
>is obviously wrong and dilutes your argument. .
>
>In summary, to be fair, the law should address the difference between
>stationary permanent lights and temporary movable lights.
>
>Jim Meyer
>
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <vision2020-request at moscow.com>
>To: <vision2020 at moscow.com>
>Sent: Sunday, January 30, 2005 11:21 PM
>Subject: Vision2020 Digest, Vol 8, Issue 190
>
>
> > Send Vision2020 mailing list submissions to
> > vision2020 at moscow.com
> >
> > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> > http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/vision2020
> > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> > vision2020-request at moscow.com
> >
> > You can reach the person managing the list at
> > vision2020-owner at moscow.com
> >
> > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> > than "Re: Contents of Vision2020 digest..."
> >
> >
> > Today's Topics:
> >
> > 1. Next Posting on Proposed Latah County Land Ordinance
> > (Jeff Harkins)
> > 2. Re: inclusive justice (Donovan Arnold)
> > 3. Re: The Auntie Establishment and Brother Carl Show forJanuary
> > 30, 2 (Joan Opyr)
> > 4. RE: Next Posting on Proposed Latah County Land Ordinance
> > (Donovan Arnold)
> >
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Message: 1
> > Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 21:04:53 -0800
> > From: Jeff Harkins <jeffh at moscow.com>
> > Subject: [Vision2020] Next Posting on Proposed Latah County Land
> > Ordinance
> > To: vision2020 at moscow.com
> > Message-ID: <6.2.0.14.0.20050130180507.057f4190 at mail.uidaho.edu>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> >
> > I am dedicating this post to Section 9.03 of the Proposed Ordinance.
>This
> > section is entitled "Design Standards for all Outdoor Lighting". I am
> > moving over Sections 3. 02 to 8 because I have exhausted all the hours
> > available to me for preparing commentary before the Tuesday Planning
> > Commission Meeting.
> >
> > I will return to the skipped Sections after that meeting.
> >
> > Section 9.03 is rather short and may best be digested if read in full -
>so
> > here it is:
> >
> > SECTION 9.03 DESIGN STANDARDS FOR ALL OUTDOOR LIGHTING
> > 9.03.01 APPLICABILITY
> > In order to conserve energy and reduce light pollution, all outdoor
>lights,
> > including lights
> > attached to any type of building or structure shall be:
> >
> > * 1. Equipped with a photo-sensor so they are automatically turned
>off
> > during daylight hours; and
> > * 2. Of a design that does not allow light to travel up or
> > horizontally; and
> > * 3. Lamped with high pressure sodium, metal halide, or compact
> > fluorescent lamps, or incandescent bulbs of 60 watts or less.
> >
> > 9.03.02 CHANGE IN USE
> > When application for a change of use or for a conditional use permit is
> > made, all existing lighting
> > must be brought into compliance with Section 9.03.01 of this ordinance.
> >
> > 9.03.03 QUASI-JUDICIAL DECISIONS
> > The Zoning Commission or the Board of Latah County Commissioners may set
> > stricter
> > conditions than are set in Section 9.03.01 of this ordinance for any
>type
> > of permit that comes
> > before them.
> >
> > Now just sit back and reflect on this proposed County Wide
> > standard. Imagine changing a tire or repairing a combine or field
>tractor,
> > installing your snow blower under a 60 watt incandescent bulb. I can
>see
> > the next line of jokes about Idaho - How many 60 watt bulbs does it take
>to
> > change a tire in Idaho? OR In Idaho, to save energy - residents are
> > required to purchase 60 watt luminaire fixtures (as many as it takes) to
> > get the light they need for a task. Or try this - In Idaho, apparently
> > folks there aren't smart enough to know to turn off their lights in the
> > daytime because County Officials have required everyone to install photo
> > sensor lights to turn them off during daylight.
> >
> > I can also imagine the headlines later this summer. Remember the
>"breast
> > exposure" issue raised in Moscow a few summers ago. Well apparently all
> > those folks who geared up with their protractors and compasses to
>determine
> > whether or not the breast was legally or illegally exposed will now have
>a
> > new task for their investment in equipment - then can go out and find
> > lights that are beaming rays out between 90 degrees and 270 degrees.
>Sigh!!!
> >
> > Come on folks - we have a lot of serious issues to be resolved in this
> > county. The last thing we need is designation of the "Illumination
>Police".
> >
> > Just so that you are fully informed, here are some price quotes for
> > replacement bulbs using the various options required by the proposed
> > ordinance - the price of the fixtures varies considerably.
> >
> > Price is cost per each
> >
> > 23W outdoor flood flourescent BR 38 $ 28.04
> > 12W NanoLux Spot $ 21.20
> > 50W High Pressure Sodium $ 10.88
> > 50W Mercury Vapor $ 10.50
> > 50W Metal Halide $ 10.88
> > 50W BR 30 Flood Incandescent $ 3.74
> >
> > I guess I trust the price system and the judgment of Latah's citizens to
>be
> > able to decide for themselves how much candlepower and lumens they need
>and
> > the means by which they provide it.
> >
> > Again, please keep your comments coming - they have been helpful.
> >
> > And try to attend the next meeting of the Latah Planning Commission on
> > Tuesday, February 1 at the Latah Courthouse at 5:30 pm,'
> >
> > While no public testimony is scheduled to be allowed, the Commissioners
>are
> > expected to discuss their findings following the previous public
>hearing.
> >
> > I urge you to draft a short letter to the Planning Commission requesting
> > that they table this ordinance until the public has had a chance to
>provide
> > full comment on the draft.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -------------- next part --------------
> > An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> > URL:
>http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20050130/d86c1aae/attachment-0001.htm
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > Message: 2
> > Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 22:06:16 -0800
> > From: "Donovan Arnold" <donovanarnold at hotmail.com>
> > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] inclusive justice
> > To: london at moscow.com, citizenx at rock.com, vision2020 at moscow.com
> > Message-ID: <BAY101-F272DB74232860297A7B54CA67C0 at phx.gbl>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
> >
> > How do we know that NSA or the owner of the building didn't apply for
>the
> > permit?
> >
> > And second, unless it was a great hindrance to the public health, why on
> > God's Earth would anyone give a damn if the zoning administrator gave
>him
>a
> > piece of paper?
> >
> > I am more concerned about snow removal and dog poo at the park.
> >
> > Donovan J Arnold
> >
> > >From: "Bill London" <london at moscow.com>
> > >To: "stigmatta x" <citizenx at rock.com>, <vision2020 at moscow.com>
> > >Subject: Re: [Vision2020] inclusive justice
> > >Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 14:36:45 -0800
> > >
> > >I think your example is off the mark. In this downtown Moscow zoning
>case,
> > >the NSA did not apply for the necessary permit. And as I understand
>the
> > >law, the city is not responsible for making sure the NSA gets that
>permit.
> > >It is NSA's responsibility.
> > >BL
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >If you wanted to build a nice wooded fence in your yard And applied for
>a
> > >permit and it was granted. would you, should you, Have to tear it
>down
> > >after it was built. Just because someone in the city goofed.
> > >_____________________________________________________
> > > List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> > > http://www.fsr.net
> > > mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> > >¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > Message: 3
> > Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 23:10:22 -0800
> > From: "Joan Opyr" <auntiestablishment at hotmail.com>
> > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] The Auntie Establishment and Brother Carl
> > Show forJanuary 30, 2
> > To: "Vision2020 Moscow" <vision2020 at moscow.com>
> > Message-ID: <BAY10-DAV22A9A8E1A9BD87FFC980F4C57C0 at phx.gbl>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> >
> > Oh, come on, Tom -- weren't you even remotely interested in my theory
>that
>Colfax doesn't actually exist? It's a Potemkin Village made entirely of
>cardboard; just two miles of empty, pointless road with a cop stationed at
>either end. The speed limit is 25 for no reason other than to enrich the
>Whitman County coffers at the expense of drivers who happen to have Idaho
>plates.
> >
> > BTW, I would like to take this opportunity to thank those listeners who
>bore with us tonight during our plague of technical difficulties. Nothing
>was working right -- for the first five minutes, neither Carl's mic nor his
>headphones were functional -- and later, well, I wasn't functional. We had
>a run of CD screw-ups, all of which were entirely my fault. Carl is hereby
>completely exonerated. He had nothing to do with it; in fact, he was in
>Colfax.
> >
> > We're still ironing out the wrinkles on the show, but it's getting to be
>quite fun. For me, and Carl, and Tom, anyway. Viva Intoleristas!
> >
> > (Intolerista. Why does that word make me want to sing the Nicaraguan
>national anthem? Does anybody here know the lyrics? Doug, Stigmatta -- do
>one you have a copy of the 'Little Red Songbook?' I feel sure you must; so
>many of your public pronouncements of late seem to have "borrowed" from it
>freely. That and 'Civilization and Its Discontents.')
> >
> > Joan Opyr/Auntie Establishment
> > www.auntie-establishment.com
> >
> > PS: Let me explain what I mean by "borrowed." To quote from the great
>Tom
>Lehrer, "Plagiarize, plagiarize, let no one's work escape your eyes, but
>please . . . call it research."
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Tom Hansen
> > Sent: Sunday, January 30, 2005 7:56 PM
> > To: vision2020 at moscow.com
> > Subject: [Vision2020] The Auntie Establishment and Brother Carl Show
>forJanuary 30, 2005
> >
> > Greetings Visionaires -
> >
> > If you were unable to tune in to the "Auntie Establishment and Brother
>Carl
> > Show" today, you missed out on a major treat.
> >
> > Although it may have started out somewhat slow, centering on a
>discussion
> > concerning Auntie Establishment's (mis)adventures in Spokane on Saturday
> > night, it quickly go into gear as they blasted away at:
> >
> > 1) Our two new trolls on the V2020 listserve (Faul Ottomaticks and
> > Stigmatta X)
> >
> > 2) Ben Merkle and his article in Volume 16, Issue 2 of the Credenda
>Agenda,
> > "Arrows in the Hand of a Limp-Wristed Man"
> > (http://www.credenda.org/issues/16-2recipio.php)
> >
> > 3) The religious right's attack on the cartoon series "Sponge Bob
>Square
> > Pants".
> >
> > One item of interest that caught my attention was that Carl Westberg Jr.
>was
> > a DJ in the Haight-Ashbury district of San Francisco during the summer
>of
> > '69.
> >
> > So, in closing I would like to state that although this group that I am
> > proud to call friends may be referred to as Intoleristas, liberal
>elitists,
> > and wackos (among a multitude of other labels) we have all come from a
> > rather diverse range of backgrounds and have experienced an even more
> > diverse range of cultures, more so than the dark corners of Moscow,
>Idaho
> > and the dark underbelly of Monroe, Louisiana.
> >
> > Take care, Moscow.
> >
> > Tom Hansen
> > Just Doing What Comes Natural
> >
> > We could learn a lot from crayons: some are sharp, some are pretty, some
>are
> > dull, some have weird names, and all are different colors....but they
>all
> > exist very nicely in the same box.
> >
> >
> > _____________________________________________________
> > List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> > http://www.fsr.net
> > mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> > /////////////////////////////////////////////////////Get more from the
>Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com
> > -------------- next part --------------
> > An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> > URL:
>http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20050130/b2799e4a/attachment-0001.htm
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > Message: 4
> > Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 23:20:01 -0800
> > From: "Donovan Arnold" <donovanarnold at hotmail.com>
> > Subject: RE: [Vision2020] Next Posting on Proposed Latah County Land
> > Ordinance
> > To: jeffh at moscow.com, vision2020 at moscow.com
> > Message-ID: <BAY101-F73FE30D164AE61537E64EA67C0 at phx.gbl>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
> >
> > Jeff,
> >
> > I want to thank you for illustrating to the public and surrounding
>counties
> > your incompetence in such matters as reviewing laws concerning land use.
> >
> > First let me start by saying, "SECTION 9.03 DESIGN STANDARDS FOR ALL
>OUTDOOR
> > LIGHTING In order to conserve energy and reduce light pollution" Is a
>very
> > GOOD idea for several reasons.
> >
> > It reduces usage of energy. You want to know why your utility bill is so
> > damn high? It is because people are doing things like using incandescent
> > light bulbs. I know T. Edison was a smart man, but we have made some
> > improvements to the light bulb since the 1901 Pan-American World Fair
> > Exhibit in Buffalo.
> >
> > A smart government would outlaw incandescent light bulbs completely. 90%
>of
> > the energy produced from a incandescent light bulb is wasted on heat.
>Less
> > than 10% of electricity you are using is being used for light. An energy
> > saving light bulb, which costs about $2.50 at your local friendly thrift
> > store and lasts 5 years, versus 6 months or less with a incandescent,
>can
> > produce the same amount of light as the $1 light bulb at about one tenth
>the
> > wattage and cost. So this idea is saving money for land users and
>helping
> > the environment. I replaced all the lights in my place and my utility
>bill
> > has gone down on average $20 a month and I never have to change the bulb
> > except once every 5 years. Sure, the extra $1.50 per bulb is expensive
>at
> > first, but I made up the difference in about a month on the utility
>bill.
> >
> > You write,
> >
> > "In Idaho, to save energy residents are required to purchase 60 watt
> > luminaire fixtures (as many as it takes) to get the light they need for
>a
> > task."
> >
> > Yes, it does take a great deal of bulbs when you use incandescent. Not
>to
> > mention they break easily, are really hot and can burn you, waste
>energy,
> > have a high malfunction rate, easily start fires, and are not very
>bright.
> > It would take 11 incandescent bulbs to do what just one 60 watt energy
> > saving bulb can do. In fact, if you had one soft light energy saving
>bulb
>at
> > 60 watts it would be so bright (650 watts of an incandescent) you would
> > probably go blind if you looked right at it, or at least cause some
> > permenent eye damage.
> >
> > You continue with speculation about others will say,
> >
> > "In Idaho, apparently folks there aren't smart enough to know to turn
>off
> > their lights in the daytime because County Officials have required
>everyone
> > to install photo sensor lights to turn them off during daylight."
> >
> > I doubt this. Part of the reason that our utility bills are so high is
> > because people leave their lights on, increasing demand for lighting.
>Much
> > of this lighting is wasted on nothing other than letting the cows see
>the
> > grass or the rocks see the trees. People should not be forced to pay
>higher
> > utility bills because someone forgot to turn their lights off. Further,
>not
> > all people are stupid for leaving their light on during the day. Some
>cannot
> > turn them off because they are gone for the weekend, and don't want
>anyone
> > thinking they are not home. Others forget to turn them off at night when
> > they go to bed. Still others turn the light on in the afternoon so they
>can
> > see when they get home in the dark. You add all this up, and it
>increases
> > energy usage significantly.
> >
> > As for light population. This is mostly because many animals get
>confused
>by
> > the lights. They use the sun and/or stars for navigation. The light
>confuses
> > them and their mating, eating, and sleeping patterns. It may seem silly,
>but
> > it is impacting the environment negatively, and we know that farmers
>very
> > much need to have a strong environment because they rely on the land. It
>is
> > needless to have lights shining brightly upward. I suggest to the farmer
>or
> > land owner trying to install a snow blower, or fix a tractor tire, to do
>it
> > in the morning, not at midnight. But I am willing to bet that most
>Farmers
> > are smarter than Mr. Harkins and could figure that one out.
> >
> > Mr. Harkins, if anymore light bulbs go off in your head, please make
>sure
> > they are efficient ones that save the farmer and land owner money.
>Because
> > so far, they have all been pretty dim or malfunctioning only leaving
>people
> > burned.
> >
> > Take care,
> >
> > Donovan J Arnold
> >
> >
> >
> > >From: Jeff Harkins <jeffh at moscow.com>
> > >To: vision2020 at moscow.com
> > >Subject: [Vision2020] Next Posting on Proposed Latah County Land
>Ordinance
> > >Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 21:04:53 -0800
> > >
> > >I am dedicating this post to Section 9.03 of the Proposed Ordinance.
>This
> > >section is entitled "Design Standards for all Outdoor Lighting". I am
> > >moving over Sections 3. 02 to 8 because I have exhausted all the hours
> > >available to me for preparing commentary before the Tuesday Planning
> > >Commission Meeting.
> > >
> > >I will return to the skipped Sections after that meeting.
> > >
> > >Section 9.03 is rather short and may best be digested if read in full -
>so
> > >here it is:
> > >
> > >SECTION 9.03 DESIGN STANDARDS FOR ALL OUTDOOR LIGHTING
> > >9.03.01 APPLICABILITY
> > >In order to conserve energy and reduce light pollution, all outdoor
>lights,
> > >including lights
> > >attached to any type of building or structure shall be:
> > >
> > > * 1. Equipped with a photo-sensor so they are automatically turned
>off
> > >during daylight hours; and
> > > * 2. Of a design that does not allow light to travel up or
> > >horizontally; and
> > > * 3. Lamped with high pressure sodium, metal halide, or compact
> > >fluorescent lamps, or incandescent bulbs of 60 watts or less.
> > >
> > >9.03.02 CHANGE IN USE
> > >When application for a change of use or for a conditional use permit is
> > >made, all existing lighting
> > >must be brought into compliance with Section 9.03.01 of this ordinance.
> > >
> > >9.03.03 QUASI-JUDICIAL DECISIONS
> > >The Zoning Commission or the Board of Latah County Commissioners may
>set
> > >stricter
> > >conditions than are set in Section 9.03.01 of this ordinance for any
>type
> > >of permit that comes
> > >before them.
> > >
> > >Now just sit back and reflect on this proposed County Wide standard.
> > >Imagine changing a tire or repairing a combine or field tractor,
>installing
> > >your snow blower under a 60 watt incandescent bulb. I can see the next
> > >line of jokes about Idaho - How many 60 watt bulbs does it take to
>change
>a
> > >tire in Idaho? OR In Idaho, to save energy - residents are required to
> > >purchase 60 watt luminaire fixtures (as many as it takes) to get the
>light
> > >they need for a task. Or try this - In Idaho, apparently folks there
> > >aren't smart enough to know to turn off their lights in the daytime
>because
> > >County Officials have required everyone to install photo sensor lights
>to
> > >turn them off during daylight.
> > >
> > >I can also imagine the headlines later this summer. Remember the
>"breast
> > >exposure" issue raised in Moscow a few summers ago. Well apparently
>all
> > >those folks who geared up with their protractors and compasses to
>determine
> > >whether or not the breast was legally or illegally exposed will now
>have
>a
> > >new task for their investment in equipment - then can go out and find
> > >lights that are beaming rays out between 90 degrees and 270 degrees.
> > >Sigh!!!
> > >
> > >Come on folks - we have a lot of serious issues to be resolved in this
> > >county. The last thing we need is designation of the "Illumination
> > >Police".
> > >
> > >Just so that you are fully informed, here are some price quotes for
> > >replacement bulbs using the various options required by the proposed
> > >ordinance - the price of the fixtures varies considerably.
> > >
> > >Price is cost per each
> > >
> > >23W outdoor flood flourescent BR 38 $ 28.04
> > >12W NanoLux Spot $ 21.20
> > >50W High Pressure Sodium $ 10.88
> > >50W Mercury Vapor $ 10.50
> > >50W Metal Halide $ 10.88
> > >50W BR 30 Flood Incandescent $ 3.74
> > >
> > >I guess I trust the price system and the judgment of Latah's citizens
>to
>be
> > >able to decide for themselves how much candlepower and lumens they need
>and
> > >the means by which they provide it.
> > >
> > >Again, please keep your comments coming - they have been helpful.
> > >
> > >And try to attend the next meeting of the Latah Planning Commission on
> > >Tuesday, February 1 at the Latah Courthouse at 5:30 pm,'
> > >
> > >While no public testimony is scheduled to be allowed, the Commissioners
>are
> > >expected to discuss their findings following the previous public
>hearing.
> > >
> > >I urge you to draft a short letter to the Planning Commission
>requesting
> > >that they table this ordinance until the public has had a chance to
>provide
> > >full comment on the draft.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >_____________________________________________________
> > > List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> > > http://www.fsr.net
> > > mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> > >¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > _____________________________________________________
> > List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> > http://www.fsr.net
> > mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> > ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
> >
> > End of Vision2020 Digest, Vol 8, Issue 190
> > ******************************************
> >
>
>_____________________________________________________
> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> http://www.fsr.net
> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
More information about the Vision2020
mailing list