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 Unpublished items are not acknowledged or returned.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:

Hats off to our school board members who are so vigilant in taking care that the funds raised in the recent bond measure are properly used.

As has been stated in previous articles and letters to The Nugget, there is some confusion as to the total amount to be spent on the new Sisters school facility (see related story, page 1).

Standard procedure throughout the school districts in the state is that the interest earned on the approved funding is part of the planning process as was done in this situation. The cost to taxpayers is $20.5 million, but the total amount available for the project is approximately $22 million which includes additional soft costs such as legal fees, permits, design costs, etc.

My greatest concern at this point is that because the media ( particularly the editorial staff and reporters at the Bend Bulletin) has once again helped to create controversy when none needed to exist, our students and community will lose out.

If in fact the taxpayers are given back the almost $2 million in interest, this in reality means a reduction of only $24 on your $200,000 property taxes. But in receiving that small tax reduction we may eliminate two or three much needed classrooms PLUS half of the new auditorium PLUS a large portion of the new science lab PLUS physical education spaces ....until our cuts equal $2 million.

Is a $24 tax reduction (this is not even a check being sent back to you) two or three years down the road per property owner worth the sacrifice that our community would be making in the long run?

Betsy Mennesson

* * *

To the Editor:

I would like to publicly thank school board members Heather Wester and Steve Keeton for representing my views regarding the newly "found" $2 million of school bond interest.

It should be returned to the voters by paying down the bond.

I say this money is newly found, because no mention of it was made to voters when considering approval of the school bond in May. I, like most voters, was led to believe that the approval was for a $20 million high school. Not $20 million plus $2 million of interest.

This lack of disclosure is disturbing at best, and unbelievable at worst. Each time a public agency goes before voters requesting passage of a bond there is an implied level of trust. If information, or in this case significant money, is found after the election, this trust level is damaged.

Your city council has worked very hard to meet the commitments it made when it asked voters to approve the sewer bond. Each time unexpected money has been acquired, it has been used to insure rates are held to this commitment. This money is not used to build a bigger and better sewer system.

In March, city residents will be voting on whether to annex the land required for the new high school. It would be a disappointment if the issue of this interest money caused a defeat in the election. Without this voter approval the high school can not be built.

I hope the school board works to maintain the residents' trust. Join me in asking the school board to build what they were authorized to build, and return the interest money to the voters by paying down the school bond.

Steve Wilson

* * *

To the Editor:

Making sense out of the current school board's quandary over what to do with the interest on the bond measure is like trying to take the knots out of your child's tennis shoes. It's simply frustrating.

"Can't you untie these shoes before you take them off?" I find myself saying over and over to our nine-year-old. "Okay," he responds. I think we're talking the same language but the next day the knots are back.

The Sisters School Board is having the same language problem. Their arguments for and against how to use the interest money twist on points of semantics. It is a tiring process because opposing sides have become entrenched.

At the moment, there are two in favor or using the interest and two against. That leaves one, Jeff Smith, giving the nod on what should be included or excluded in the final construction. The other four may as well go home, leaving Jeff with a check-off list of disputable school items. This would be a curious scenario after so much community team effort went into passing the bond measure.

The board should be congratulated on maximizing the money that the taxpayers agreed to pay for the new school. The clearly set precedent as to what to do with the interest is to add it back to the construction fund.

Such is the case with 50 other Oregon school districts queried about similar bond measures. Now, at no additional cost to the taxpayer, not just a good school but a great school can be built. This is a win-win situation for the students and the community of Sisters.

Giving back the interest sounds like a very magnanimous gesture, but that's all it is -- a gesture. The dollar amount we're debating equals a few coffee latts. When you compare that to building a great school, Jeff, isn't the choice clear?

Paul Alan Bennett

* * *

To the Editor:

I realized I didn't know enough about the issues after reading Jeff Jones' letter about why a couple of the members of the school board were voting to refund the interest on the bond to build the new high school.

I'm still pretty puzzled about it, because I figure it's a whole lot harder for a member of the school board to vote to return money to the voters than it is for them to vote to keep the money for the construction of the new school, the new gym and the new playing fields.

I'm pro-sports, so I certainly wouldn't want to see the new gym and the additional playing fields go bye-bye because the board voted to refund $12-$14 to each of us.

But Heather and Steve are sharp people, so I'm anxious to hear their opinions at the next board meeting at noon, Friday, November 2, at the high school.

See you there.

Ed Fitzjarrell

* * *

To the Editor:

With this weekend, we saw the passing of an important protector of this corner of Paradise.

Victoria "Vickie" Churchill, nearly 30 year resident of Black Butte Ranch, passed on. Why should we, who were not in her close circle of friends, care? Because she was a tireless advocate for the preservation of this beautiful area.

She once told me, "They call me a tree-hugger. That's fine. I just want to preserve what is here!"

Vickie knew the name of every tree, shrub and flower growing here. And many are still flourishing because she fought to protect them.

Bill Smith, first general manager of Black Butte Ranch, once said of Vickie, at a BBR Historical Society meeting, " ... she was a good conscience for early ranch management."

Growth of an area means many things are destroyed. In the enthusiasm of "progress" there must be those who make us stop and think about the value of what may be sacrificed forever. Vickie Churchill made many stop. We all owe her thanks for protecting so much.

Who will step forward and carry her pennant?

Jean Nave

* * *

To the Editor:

When Franklin Delano Roosevelt was elected President of the United States, he said, "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself -- nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance." (Inaugural address, 1933).

I had just finished my paper route on December 7, 1941 when a woman banged on the door of our home terrified over the news that the Japanese had just bombed Pearl Harbor.

Not long after that I sat with my grandfather in the milk barn listening to President Roosevelt ask congress to declare war on the Empire of Japan, and in his speech he said:

"Always will we remember the character of the onslaught against us. No matter how long it may take us to overcome this premeditated invasion, the American people in their righteous might will win through to absolute victory...

"Hostilities exist. There is no blinking at the fact that our people, our territory and our interests are in grave danger. With confidence in our armed forces -- with the unbounding determination of our people -- we will gain the inevitable triumph -- so help us God."

It was during those years I was also thrilled over and over again by the words of British Prime Minister Winston Churchill.

It seems appropriate to remember Churchill's statements when he was confronted by the specter of Nazi Germany invading his homeland -- as we combat the specter of terrorists that have already invaded our homeland.

"We shall defend our island (nation) whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills, we shall never surrender."

With the horrifying shadow of anthrax now all about us, and God-only-knows what else terrorists' may have in store; we really do have nothing to fear but fear itself. Even though our people, our territory and our interests are in grave danger -- for we shall fight them everywhere and never surrender -- victory over terrorism must be our goal -- so help us God.

Jim Anderson

* * *

To the Editor:

We have an urgent need for a truck by-pass. A couplet would not accomplish the truck problem.

What is the mystery that seems to surround the bypass? It is a simple solution. Let's do it!

Murray Hilt