The Kennewick courier-reporter. [volume] (Kennewick, Wash.) 1914-1938, 1916-06-15
PRATT AND THE PORT

PRATT AND THE PORT
IN another column of this issue
! there is published a commune
cation from R. E. Pratt bearing
upon the Forthcoming port dis
trict election. Mr.. Pratt pre-
faces his communication by say
ING. 81 was very much interested
in a speech made by you on a
recent occasion, wherein you set
forth the fact and made it clear
to the audience present that this
valley had cut out the hot air
peddiing' of the earlier days and
was now making good from a
practical standpoint. : Your
talk certainly listened good to
me and feel very sure that 1T
met with the approval of nearly,
if not all, present on that occa-
sion"
The editor remembers very
distinctly the occasion referred
to. It is indeed gratifying to
know that Mr.. Pratt approved
of the speech and heartily
agreed with the sentiments ex-
pressed. 1t is doubly gratifying
because, as Mr.. Pratt will re-
member, there was at that time
displayed on the wall, maps and
charts of the comprehensive
scheme of harbor improvement
to be voted on at the forthcom-
ing election, and that the speak
er called the attention of the au-
dience to these charts and cited
them as proof of the statement
that the community had aban-
doned the old practice of wasted
effort, random expenditures and
shooting in the dark and had
adopted systematized, practical
and common sense methods OF
community development both on
the farm and in town.
Mr.. Pratt will also remember,
if he remained awake to the
close of the speech, that the
speaker said the community had
discarded the spectacular and
spasmodic effort for the slower
and safer method of first study.
! ing the community's needs anc
then striving to supply those
. needs; that we were. now at
!, tempting to coordinate our Ell
forts toward definite end ant
| to make every progressive stel
/ a part of a definite and compre
| hensive plan of development
II Here again the speaker cited thu
\ proposed harbor scheme as al
Il instance where the community
/ was working under this new or
Il der of things.
Il If this "listened good" to Mr.
Il Pratt then why doesn't it lister
II good to him now? Mr.. Pratt
Il asks "Shall we stick to the ten
Il cts of your speech or start OF
II on a tangent that won't get u
Il anywhere ?" So far as the edi
tor is concerned he refuses to g
off on tangent and intends t
stick by the tenets of his speed
| by voting for the COMPREHENSIVE
scheme of harbor improvement
| and in so voting he will have tn
Il knowledge that, should the pla
II be adopted, every expendftur
Il will be protected and every in
II provement utilized as a part c
the general plan.
. Mr.. Pratt says he is in fave
- of the port districts purchasin
Il the present dock, fixing it up
II meet present needs and maxim
/ such extensions as may be neet
Il ed to meet future needs. AS "
understand it, that is just exac
Il w what is contemplated by ii
Il comprehensive scheme. II
Il only difference between VIII;
h Mr.. Pratt wants and what tt
commissioners are offering
that the commissioners ha,
outlined plans for such extel
sions as may be needed fro
time to time and Mr.. Pratt nj
not. In other words, Mr.. Fra
advocates q random expenditul
now and another random expel
diture next year or in five year
whereas the commissioners pr
pose a plan whereby the in
provement made this year c.
he utilized as an integral pa
of the Improvement made ne
wear or five or ten years henc
In short, Mr.. Pratt is argull
for wasted effort, random e
penditures, slipshod and ha
hazard business methods
o.,;rs+ cpsteynatiZed. practic;