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 Unpublished items are not acknowledged or returned.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:

Over-building and high density street concerns packed out the December 12 City Council meeting! The standing room only crowd voiced concerns and displeasure over the influx of Habitat houses and the changing of single dwelling neighborhood lots into multiple dwelling sites.

The audience was told by the council's lawyer that one man, the city planner, Neil Thompson, is the decision maker on adding Habitat units or turning single family lots into three or four lots for multiple use. A committee of one decides!

Merl Monroe submitted a signed petition for a three-month moratorium on issuing building permits.

Ex-Mayor, Steve Wilson, told us that the master plan that he had voted on several months ago was not the plan he thought it would be and apologized.

Former council member, Tim Clasen, also spoke. He too said "it is not right to continue the high density actions of the city planner." The benefactors will be builders, developers, landlords and investors, while single family, retirees, and the elderly are losing privacy and livability.

Putting three dwelling on a 13,000-square-foot lot potentially adds six extra cars, more noise pollution and over-crowding; let alone more traffic in a residential neighborhood. If a proliferation of duplexes, apartments and low cost housing continues in the way it is now, every single family residence will have multiple family, two-story townhouses out their front or back door.

We need an official internal investigation immediately on the way the master plan was voted on, how the plan was written, and how Mr. Thompson might have modified it by bending the "State Guidelines."

We ask that ALL of you look out YOUR front or back windows and ask yourselves if you would like to have complexes like Hillsboro in your backyard and let your voices be heard!

Mike and Lynn Berg

Mel Bryan

George Sproat

Ted Creason

* * *

To the Editor:

The density issue of residential building within the city of Sisters is getting out of hand and something needs to be done about it and soon.

My feelings are not necessarily aimed to Habitat for Humanity but the overall density that is being allowed. I personally think housing as Habitat is trying to provide is needed but not at the cost of cutting one lot into three and placing three on the original lot.

If I did not believe in what they are trying to accomplish I would not be involved in the construction of these homes.

Why doesn't this group consider cutting some of their own property, about donating land, selling at a largely reduced cost instead of wanting to clutter our neighborhood.

I am talking about Pine Meadow Ranch, Black Butte Ranch and other gated communities. We all have a pretty good idea what the response to such a request would be.

Additional traffic will affect the entire area and the Highway 20 crossing, especially in the summer.

All city residents should be notified about any and all residential buildings proposed. If a 250-foot limit is the law then we need to work on changing the law.

I understand that entire electric grid for Edge of the Pines may have to be completely rebuilt within a timeframe of two to five years. Hey folks, guess who gets to help with this expense on top of approximately $12 million plus for sewer and $20 million school.

I personally want to thank the senior citizens in our neighborhood who took the time and effort to make their feelings and thoughts known to the city who were not able to attend the Dec. 12 city council meeting because of health problems.

Merlin C. Monroe

* * *

To the Editor:

Years ago I learned that most editorials are simply the opinion of the writer. Many times they have nothing to do with the truth of the issues discussed. They entertain and amuse the reader and sell newspapers.

Unfortunately, they provide some writers a forum to appease their own desires for self-aggrandizement and grandiosity, not to mention advancing an ill-disguised political agenda. I fear this is the case with your editorial. While I did find parts of the editorial amusing, the general paranoia and sarcasm of the author was exceeded only by an incredible display of arrogance.

Can we get on with the business of running the country and agree that the U.S. Supreme Court had to override an out of control Florida judiciary seeking to change the election laws after the fact? Our President doesn't possess absolute power as this is not a dictatorship.

Please tell me how your individual rights, or of those with whom you are acquainted, have been violated in the past several months. I have heard nothing in the local or regional press about multitudes of people being hauled off to jail in the middle of the night.

Today's problems of business corruption happened over many years and the previous administration shares a great deal of this responsibility. Also, gutting our intelligence and military capability came out of flawed and corrupt policies based on a belief that after Russia imploded, all the bad guys were gone.

The facts are that the world is, was, and always will be a dangerous place. That is the nature of human civilization. We happen to be on the top of the heap at this time. The lifestyle you enjoy was bought with the precious blood of thousands of Americans.

We have defended our freedom in the past and if we expect to keep it we must remember that "the price of liberty is eternal vigilance."

Terry Burke

* * *

To the Editor:

So many Americans are accepting without question the administration's explanation of what must be done in everything from Iraq to terrorism. Blind acceptance for whatever Bush and his advisors say without healthy skeptism could lead us to a serious loss of democracy.

Where is there justification for what Iraq is being charged with? I am not saying that there might not be weapons that should be destroyed but if there are why not make the U.N. inspectors privy to our information so they may look to those locations?

Why is North Korea allowed atomic bombs and missiles and perhaps chemical and biological weapons and their threat value is lower than Iraq? Or is the drumbeat for war only a cover for oil access?

Why are persons who have a background of adversity to that position always filling the administration top government jobs?

Why has the drug company Lilly been exempted from lawsuits in the homeland security bill? Why not all drug companies? Is it because there is a tie in with Bush (last Sunday's "60 Minutes" report)? What does drug manufacturing have to do with homeland security anyhow?

According to a news article in last weeks Bend Bulletin, smallpox is very hard to turn into a weapon. Are we being subjected to more scare propaganda? Do we have information that terrorists or soldiers of other countries are being immunized so there may be a use of smallpox? I'm not sure that any leader would want to use such a weapon, which may also kill the majority of his own followers.

And in the end I wish to say I am more worried about the state of the investment markets and the administration's lack of desire to get the corruption sorted out and prevented than any war talk or terrorism. If our economy cannot be trusted and begins to fail more than it has none of us will be living as well in the future.

Sincerely,

B. Graham

* * *

To the Editor:

As a newcomer to this area, I was surprised and dismayed by your editorial about "... King George." It was a sarcastic, puerile, distorted diatribe; the worst I have ever seen in a "nonpartisan" community newspaper.

This is a small-town newspaper and it may be that we should not expect much insight in its pages but it seems to me the serious issues of our time should be addressed in a serious, responsible manner. The Bill of Rights is not at risk here. Honest analysis is.

Donald S. Harner

* * *

To the Editor:

God bless you for caring enough for our country to use the powerful avenue you have been given to speak the truth. This takes courage and is not always easy to do.

As the Bush beat their tribal drums inciting America, we find ourselves teetering on the edge of a dramatic fall from the grace of God into the abyss of treachery and deceit. America has suffered tragedies before without giving up all authority to one man.

Wealth has made America apathetic toward the witch's brew stirred up in this White House. Even people who have previously been too smart to swallow the poison of the brew (once swallowed it scares bright people into a stupor) have accepted as a prescription for preventive medicine.

And yes it is the rich who are in power but we can't blame it all on the rich for the poor have allowed themselves apathy using the old "my vote won't count." It is easy to understand the deep distrust the poor have of the rich and powerful in America but if we don't exercise the powers we are given we only give them more power.

It may be too late now to vote out the evil that is in control of our government but we still have a powerful tool. The most powerful tool of all. The power of prayer. Just as God forgave and spared the people of Nineveh so can America be spared. I pray that God will speak to the leaders of our country and to the leaders of the rest of the world.

I have 13 grandsons, none of which I am willing to sacrifice on the altar of one monstrous ego.

Thank you again.

Cathy Stark

* * *

To the Editor:

Eric Dolson, in his December 4 editorial did not provide anyone with an "urgent wake up call" about anything. Much like Rush Limbaugh, on the conservative side, he only added fuel to a fire that has been burning between liberals and conservatives since Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal and beyond.

If we, as citizens of this country, are relying on editorials to be written to give us a needed wake up call, we need to take a closer look at where our problems really lay. We only need to receive unbiased information and facts from many resources, then form our own opinions based on that.

I stand amazed at the number of people that cry out for the government to take care of their lives with every social program that can be imagined. But on the other hand, recoil in the paranoia of lost civil liberties, the degradation of our Bill of Rights and the usurping of our precious Constitution they believe will be the results of our government trying to protect us against foes, both foreign and domestic.

I am astonished when I hear or read how some folks believe how wrong it is for our sons, daughters and others in the military to be sent off to possibly die in a war they don't support. And yet those same folks turn their backs to the cries of literally thousands of unborn babies that are killed in this country each year for no reason at all.

It dawned on me that we, as a society, have become so polarized on political issues that right and wrong or good and bad are not the issues anymore. The only thing that matters is whether something is liberal versus conservative.

Am I advocating not listening to the Eric Dolsons or Rush Limbaughs of the world? Certainly not. Both are intelligent individuals with points of views that need to be heard, disseminated, massaged and utilized with other sources of information to enable us to make conscious decisions concerning problems that face us all. If you feel you need a wake up call, maybe you should try leaving the sleeping pills alone.

Wayne Rowe

* * *

To the Editor:

If Gene Garton thinks that our way of life was created by the "corporate aristocracy" he should go back and reread his history books.

It was built by men and women in all walks of life.

The corporate aristocracy was a latecomer and in many instances the "robber barons " needed to be controlled by vigorous and vocal opposition.

Mr. Garton takes comfort in the fact that the President was elected by law and sworn in as President and that our rights and freedoms will be adequately protected by the courts, the politicians, and presidential order.

I sincerely hope he is right but we must remember that these rights have been put in place by laws and vigorously defended against modification or abridgment in the past.

Congress and the courts should be very reluctant to rescind them now. I would remind Mr. Garton that Adolf Hitler was also duly elected and sworn in as Chancellor in Germany at a time when the German economy was struggling, and the population was afraid of its neighbors.

Promising to correct these problems, he "coordinated" the police and the courts, abridged citizens' rights, and built a powerful military machine while demonizing non-Germanic races.

He was very popular but those who opposed him thought he could be "controlled."

Germans thought that a strong Commander in Chief and a powerful military would protect their way of life but they were wrong.

In some ways our conditions are very similar.

We have an administration backed by a rich and powerful corporate force, a press largely owned and run by the same industrial complex, a military predominance unequaled in the history of the world, no effective political opposition, and a population which, angry and chagrined at a horrible terrorist strike, enthusiastically embraces the simplistic idea of a war as a way to ensure our survival and validate our institutions.

Unfortunately, war has never validated anything.

In the past it has been a last resort for our country. It should remain so.

Phil Blatt

* * *

To the Editor:

I do not know Steve Swisher's PERS situation. I do know that PERS is not bankrupting Oregon and if your knowledge of PERS is based on newspaper articles, you are grossly under-informed.

The most common political ploy when politicians cannot fix the real problem (the economy/stock market) is to find a scapegoat (PERS retirees) to anger and divert the public away from the real issues.

My husband and I worked for the state for over 20 years. We resent being considered a budget burden, and not entitled to our retirement benefits. Our PERS benefits are half of what our state salary was. We could not have retired solely on our PERS benefits.

Our PERS money is returned to this community. Businesses in Sisters may be surprised to realize how much of the money in their till comes from PERS.

As a retired state employee, I am tired of my PERS benefits looked at as reducing the money available for education, while school employees are viewed as victims. The largest active group in PERS is public school system employees (40 percent).

They also receive the largest percentage of employer contributions to their retirement accounts (3 percent higher than state or other political subdivisions). As state agency retirees, my husband and I pay over $650 a month for our health insurance. Some Oregon school districts pay 100 percent of their retiree and spouses' health insurance. This is your property tax dollars.

Some retirees can continue to work for the state and receive PERS benefits. The number of hours they can work in a year is limited, they do not receive most benefits and in short, are cheaper for the state to hire than permanent full-time employees -- i.e., this practice saves tax dollars.

Get your facts straight before you criticize PERS recipients or Mr. Swisher.

Nancy Buffinton-Kelm

* * *

To the Editor:

I am the parent of a sophomore at Sisters High School as well as a soon-to-be-retiring member of the Sisters High School Site Council.

I have to tell you how very privileged I feel to be a part of the Sisters educational community especially since we do not live in the Sisters School District (our home on Couch Market Road puts us in the Redmond School District). After two years of being on the waiting list and petitioning the Redmond School Board my children were released from Redmond and allowed to attend the Sisters schools.

I know after seeing my children succeed at school and through my participation on the site council that I made the right choice.

I also continue to feel that due in large part to both Steve Swisher's dedication and hard work as well as the enthusiastic determination of Boyd Keyser that the students in the Sisters School District are truly in the best system in the state.

The purpose of this letter is to ask the Sisters community to encourage the Sisters School Board members to maintain the integrity of the Sisters School District as Steve Swisher has and to look for someone to take his place who will continue his vision and enthusiasm.

My suggestion to them is to look at the resources at hand and to see that they don't have to look far to find the ideal replacement, that being Boyd Keyser.

Boyd has proven himself within the Sisters School District as an enthusiastic educator and leader in the high school setting. He has also worked tirelessly to get the new high school built within the budget that the community and the board are most comfortable with. He knows how to compromise and to get things done to everyone's satisfaction and benefit. These are just a few reasons for the board members to consider Mr. Keyser as the Sisters School Superintendent.

Sincerely,

Betsy Mennesson

* * *

To the Editor:

I am writing to say a huge thank you to the leadership of Sisters Habitat for Humanity and to all the people that took time out to come to my ground breaking ceremony on Saturday, December 7. The outpouring of support and love was truly overwhelming and appreciated.

I love living in the city of Sisters and I love the people of our community. My dream of one day being able to own my own home here has always been on the back burner and more than a little out of reach. But with the help of Habitat for Humanity, and the generosity of all involved, Saturday was a dream come true!

Again, thank you so much to all those that have helped me. Your support has not gone unnoticed!

In awe,

Lupe Chamberlain

* * *

To the Editor:

Happy Holidays. Bah Hum Bug. Winter Break? What is that? An employee at Barnes and Noble was reprimanded for telling my husband "Merry Christmas," and she shyly replied, "I mean, Happy Holiday. . ."

It all seems so silly.

What is this holiday that we are happily celebrating? The courtrooms have to take down the Ten Commandments but weren't the words, "I swear to tell the whole truth, so help me God" stated not so long ago?

And poor Tiny Tim will soon have to have the voice-over that says, "Heaven help us every one," instead of his famous "God, bless us everyone."

Shouldn't we be offended that we imply the legend of Santa is truth to our children, and that our schools sing about flying reindeer?

I, however do have my stockings hung by the chimney with care, but my children know why we celebrate the gift giving season.

I fear it is only a matter of time that our coin and money is reprinted as to not offend everyone because "In God We Trust" is not politically correct. I know our forefathers founded this country with God and I fear this country is going to end without him. . . and I do mean end.

Celebrating his birth,

Becky Aylor

* * *

To the Editor:

Living some distance from Sisters, I just received the November 13 issue with the infamous "bear" article. Although the article is old news, I'd like to share some thoughts that seem especially appropriate in this season.

For a long time, we who have presumed to take on the mantle "homo sapiens" (wise human being) have gotten along with each other by practicing what we call the Golden Rule.

I think it's worth noting that, rather than being a quaint concept to be touched on in Sunday School and forgotten, the Golden Rule pervades our everyday interactions and is key to our progress toward becoming more civilized.

Even though there may be lapses, most of us adhere to the practice of the Golden Rule as best we can, knowing that it will help us maintain good relations with others, friends and strangers alike.

So I would propose an extension of the Golden Rule to our fellow travelers on this planet, those animals with whom we share its generous habitat. I propose that we don't kill other animals when our survival is not at stake.

Rather, we dip into our noble human nature and treat them with the respect that we would like extended to ourselves. When a bear (or any other critter) is going about its daily routine, minding its own business, we should put ourselves in its position and ponder what it's like to be subjected to an unprovoked and deadly attack by another species.

Jim Morrell has indicated that he intends to kill another bear. If he would pledge to stop killing now, I will gladly send him one of my Nikons with which he can "shoot" his next bear, and the next, and the next....

Sincerely,

John Nidecker

Alameda, California