Letters, letters, letters

The Nugget welcomes contributions from its readers, which must include the writer's name, address and phone number. Letters to the Editor is an open forum for the community and contains unsolicited opinions not necessarily shared by the Editor. The Nugget reserves the right to edit, omit, respond or ask for a response to letters submitted to the Editor. Letters should be no longer than 300 words. Unpublished items are not acknowledged or returned. The deadline for all letters is noon Monday.

To the Editor:

Concerning the editorial "ODOT pushes Sisters couplet," (The Nugget, March 7, page 2): I have been living eight miles east of Sisters for 17 years.

I saw the need for a solution to the traffic congestion back in 1984. I have seen it get worse and worse, and I have watched there be NOTHING done but a lot of talk.

I do agree that the local people should have a voice in the process of choosing how to solve the problem. And if the people of Sisters want a solution other than the couplet, then let's see it, and I will support it.

But I believe that many of the business owners of Sisters don't really want the problem solved.

I am one local driver who is very tired of driving on a jammed major highway through the middle of a shopping mall every time I need to get to the grocery store and back.

I am glad that ODOT will eventually put the interests of the public at large over the interests of a few business owners.

Jim Veenker

* * *

To the Editor:

It seems like every 10 to 12 years there is a new group of ODOT (Oregon Department of Transportation) people and at that time the couplet issue rises again. I realize that ODOT is in the building business and comes from an engineering background. But it is their responsibility to look at the findings and policies that have been developed by the citizens and city of Sisters in the proposed comprehensive plan.

Having grown up in Redmond and seen what happened to the downtown area with the introduction of a couplet, I am against the idea. You can hardly cross the street without a light. It is not a pedestrian-friendly solution to capacity issues. Madras and Lebanon are the same.

A couplet is only one of many solutions possible.

Sisters has a "seasonal traffic challenge." How has ODOT dealt with similar seasonal challenges in other parts of the state? Why go to the expense to build a couplet for seasonal, Sunday congestion?

Livability is an issue for residents of Sisters. When traffic flow is increased within the city, streets will be harder to cross (two busy streets instead of one).

Is a thoroughfare really the goal for Sisters? It does not appear so in the proposed comprehensive plan. Our city is pedestrian-friendly. ODOT's goal to move cars through town faster is a conflict with this.

Even if a couplet was built there would still be a bottleneck at each end of town. Cars would speed up in town then have to slow down at each end which does not accomplish the ODOT goal.

In the proposed comprehensive plan that the city council approved the #1 policy under the transportation part states that the city should pursue an alternative route. There has already been put into place pursuing arterial streets and collector streets, and alternate routes on busy weekends. The city should continue to pursue these alternatives. We have seen some positive changes.

Jean Wells Keenan

* * *

To the Editor:

I wish to make some observations relative to the school district's effort to pass a new school-building bond.

My first question is the need for the district to employ both an architect and an engineering firm to oversee the repairs to the high school building. It seems to me that the problem is one of the physics of water movement not one that an architect would also have to be involved in. Is this a double expenditure of money for the same problem?

When I read the letter in which the problems of the middle school are enumerated, I feel the remedy of take down the old and build new is the mind-set of those on the school board.

Until I see more than five portable classrooms on a school site, I do not consider the school overcrowded. In the case of the middle school there is room for enough portables to accommodate the students.

Considering that a portable classroom costs around $20,000 complete with its own heating and cooling and carpet and whiteboards it would seem a much less expensive outlay for a district than trying to build a new school for a needed few rooms. This would enable the remodeling of the current school's interior to take care of the enumerated problems given in the newsletter of February 13.

Speaking of which, when the given locations are listed as "too small," I would like to be given the information of what that phrase specifies in relation to each item. For example, to some school district homeowners a room designed for 24 which now must accommodate 30 would not show a real urgency.

I would also question why the activity area on the grade school field is not large enough for both schools.

In school districts across the Pacific Northwest, good teaching gets done in less than a perfect architectural environment. It seems in a lot of the written material that arrives in the mail or is read in the newspaper tries to give the implication that education in Sisters cannot be top flight without big expenditures. Reality is that good education is the result of teachers who try to do their best and are given good books and necessary classroom equipment.

Sincerely,

B. Graham

* * *

To the Editor:

As an active community member who routinely volunteers hundreds of hours per year in various capacities on public land, I urge the Sisters community to let our Senators Wyden and Smith know that we oppose the federal government's program to charge us to access public lands.

The Recreation Fee Demonstration Program was a theoretical, logistical, and financial nightmare from its conception and is born of greed and corruption at a corporate level far from the land itself.

I ask few things of my country. Being able to park my vehicle and take my dog for a walk on federal land is something I expect to be able to do. It is a double slap in the face when I am charged $5 for a 10 minute visit to lands that have already been mined, logged, or grazed for less per acre than I'm paying to walk across it.

Fee Demo (Trail Fees) is an insult to the success and prosperity of this country and a first step to removing the freedoms historically enjoyed by Americans.

I buy my state park pass every year. I willingly pay to stay in campgrounds if I choose to use them. But why on earth, should I pay for my experience on less developed public land? There are many reasons to oppose fee demo.

The more you learn about this insidious program, the more scared you will become. Be afraid. Be very afraid. We need to educate ourselves and loudly voice our opinions, before this program becomes permanent.

We can check out http://www.notrailfees.org and http://www.wildwilderness.org for more details. We can let our congressmen know how we feel. We can talk to our friends and neighbors and urge them to voice their opinions. We can refuse to support this program. I welcome the opportunity to speak with anyone about this topic. We need to stop it before we've lost what is ours. Do not buy a North West Forest Pass! There is a better way.

Kate Beardsley

* * *

To the Editor:

I came in yesterday after finding a rhododendron that my husband planted for me half stripped of its leaves.

Am I alone in thinking that we have a deer problem in town?

I used to be able to raise tulips and other flowers, but now unless I spray deer repellent and spray it often, they eat anything in sight.

Am I alone in thinking that some people who think it is so great to feed these wild creatures, need to stop?

Before people started moving from the cities and feeding them, we used to see an occasional deer in town and that was unique.

Now, an occasional deer would be a blessing.

I walk out of my house, three blocks from Cascade Avenue, to find a herd of 20 to 40 deer in my yard.

I can't walk in my yard without being extra careful where I step, and I have a big yard. I clean up after my puppy, but I don't think I should have to clean up after herds of wildlife.

How long is it going to be before someone goes speeding down one of the back streets in the early morning and plows into one or more deer in a herd? Sooner or later someone is going to get hurt.

Is anyone else concerned about this or am I just getting grumpy as I am getting older?

Is there something the city could do to minimize this problem?

The rhododendron might not be a big deal to some people, but I just lost Keith, I don't want to lose the memories that went along with that plant and others in my yard, just to feed a wild animal that should be out in the wild eating the stuff that makes them healthy.

I use to like deer, now if I had a gun and it was legal, there would be a lot fewer deer in the world.

Thank you,

Shirley Miller

* * *

To the Editor:

Now that the SOAR basketball tournament season is over, I would like to publicly thank Curt Lange for being an awesome coach for fifth graders in the community.

Not only did Curt have a desire to win games at the tournaments, but he balanced that need with his desire that children end the season with a "good taste for basketball in their mouths."

He took the time to reach all the kids who came out for the sport, regardless of ability.

Cindy Glick