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 Unpublished items are not acknowledged or returned.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:

Our two sons have been in the Sisters public schools since kindergarten. Their experience has been all we could hope for.

Now that the oldest is in high school, it was with great interest that I read the article the September 29 issue of The Nugget, "Some stories behind the SAT scores."

I was particularly interested in the quote from Sisters High School Principal Bob Macauley who reportedly said, "...we were able to preserve all our honors and advanced classes."

This seems to contradict something we received from the high school. I refer to a letter our son brought home dated September 20, addressed to parents and signed by Bob Macauley. In the letter the principal states: "After consideration of possible options to alleviate large class size and maintain the quality of education in ninth grade English classes, the decision was made by school administration to incorporate the honors students into the English 9 classes and offer enrichment options to honors students throughout the year."

I am confused by the mixed messages.

Cindy Uttley

* * *

To the Editor:

In the article titled "Some stories behind the SAT scores" in the September 29, issue, Sisters High School Principal Bob Macauley is quoted as saying "in the current year, despite budget cuts, we have added AP (advanced placement) English to the curriculum and we were able to preserve all our honors and advanced classes...."

This quote must have been given before September 20, because on that day, a letter signed by Bob Macauley, and addressed to the parents of the Honors English 9 students, was sent home. It stated "After consideration of possible options to alleviate large class size and maintain the quality of education in ninth grade English classes, the decision was made by school administration to incorporate the honors students into the English 9 classes..."

Obviously the quote given by Mr. Macauley in The Nugget article is no longer accurate and the public needs to be aware of this fact.

I would hope that this information would raise concerns in our community that we are not providing the best possible education to all of our students. These ninth graders have worked hard over the years and deserve to be placed in a class where they will be challenged by other students at the same academic level. What a shame that these students are being punished because there are too many of them.

I wonder how this decision will affect the future SAT scores of these particular students.

Robin Carlson

* * *

To the Editor:

To the citizens of Sisters School District:

Sisters school students belong to all of us: parents, grandparents, neighbors, friends, senior citizens, and teachers. We all benefit from the wonderful success our students achieve on a daily basis.

Their success has been helped a great deal with the support of the local option. Our local option tax is an example of how this community steps up to ensure our students get a quality education and the skills they need to be positive leaders as adults. I hope you will agree that renewing the local option is vital to their continued success.

The local option tax has created smaller class sizes, an all-important step in the process of meeting the needs of each student. With smaller class sizes students are given more personal time with the teacher to learn at their rate. Additionally, smaller class size allows students to learn in a safe, healthy, and orderly setting where discipline and behavior problems are less likely to get in the way of learning. Individuals get the attention they need to develop self-confidence and understanding.

Our test scores are something to celebrate. Many of our students exceed the state benchmark. Because of local option dollars students are prepared for these tests. When teachers are able to spend more one on one time with students, it is more likely their needs will be met. Local money helps us stay current with technology, up-to-date materials and textbooks to better prepare our students.

I am proud to represent the teachers of the Sisters School District. Their enthusiasm, passion and commitment play a major role in what makes our district one of the best districts in the state. You, the citizens of Sisters, fill the other role. Your continued support keeps the students learning in school, and involved in programs after school that enrich all our lives.

For our students and our future, please renew the local option.

Kelly Powell

Third Grade Teacher, President of Sisters Education Association

* * *

To the Editor:

Sisters residents have the opportunity to maintain excellence in Sisters schools. The local option levy on the November ballot will NOT raise our taxes! It WILL maintain class sizes and provide needed materials and equipment, helping to continue outstanding academic and co-curricular achievement.

As parents with children in Sisters schools, we know the importance of keeping class sizes down and having up to date textbooks and technology available to our children.

As business owners, we know that a great school district is good for business. It is an extremely important part of Sisters' identity.

We thank you for passing the local option four years ago. Please join us in voting yes for its renewal.

To all new residents, please register to vote so you can participate in this important election that will make a difference in the lives of local children.

Sincerely ,

Rod and Susan Robinson

Mike and Daiya Owen

* * *

To the Editor:

After reading the opinion piece by your guest columnists, Linda and Tom Davis, urging us to vote against Ballot Measure 37 (The Nugget, September 29, page 2), I would like to show that there is another side to the story. It is my story.

In the early 1970s I bought an 11-acre tract of land in Linn County as an investment. At that time it was zoned Rural Residence 5, which meant two houses could be placed on it. While my wife and I were in the Peace Corps from 1988 through 1990 the zoning was changed to forest production.

After moving from Linn County to Sisters in 1993, for all the reasons most of us moved here, I decided to sell the property. The Realtor that I dealt with checked things out and found that there could no longer be any houses on the property. This cut the value down to about one-half. The remaining value was mostly because there is some timber.

I found that I could protest this ruling by spending a lot of money and if I won the ruling would probably be protested by 1,000 Friends of Oregon. More money down the tube. But it seemed that this was so unfair surely somebody would write a ballot measure to correct the inequity.

A ballot measure was sponsored and passed overwhelmingly about three years ago only to be overruled by the Supreme Court. It passed even though the opposition outspent support for the measure by a considerable amount of money.

So now we have another chance to make things right, but we supporters can't become complacent just because the last try passed so handily. We've got to realize that the state government will not support this measure. Just the other day I saw one of our representatives degrading the measure for much the same reasons cited by Linda and Tom.

In my case the cost to the government will be considerably ameliorated by the increased taxes the property will pay if housing is permitted. There are houses on three sides of me with a paved county road serving all of us. Since my property is in small woodlands tax category I only pay slightly more than $100 in taxes per year. I would guess that with the land developed to its potential it could bring in somewhat more than $1,000 per year.

I urge you to vote in favor of Ballot Measure 37. With the support it got last time around, there must be a lot more people than me that have been damaged. Besides, is that any way for a government of the people to treat the citizenry? This is more typical of something that would happen in China.

Gale Larson

* * *

To the Editor:

Measure 37 (Son of 7) is going to be on the ballot in November. This measure would allow land owners to develop their land by the rules in place when they or their family members bought the land or sue to recover their perceived value.

This would allow long time land owners to build anything anywhere because the zoning authorities don't have the money to compensate the land owners for the perceived loss of value.

Oregon's land use laws were put in place when farming and logging were much more important parts of the economy. It is time to revisit those decisions.

Measure 37 would just throw them out.

Measure 37 could reduce the value of your property by allowing your neighbor to build a subdivision, apartment building, strip mall, or industrial park next door. It would swamp planning staff, slowing down the issuance of building permits. It would allow Sisters, Bend, and Redmond to be connected by strip malls. It would allow timber companies to build cities in the woods.

It would allow Burger King to build on any lot in Sisters that has been owned for more than 30 years.

Measure 37 would destroy the values that brought many of us here. Call Rep. Gene Whisnant (598-7560) and Sen. Ben Westlund (383-4444) and tell them that the forest and farm rules are too restrictive. We need to ease land use restrictions, not eliminate them.

Vote no on 37.

Bruce Berryhill

* * *

To the Editor:

Up until the debate I had always thought that President Bush's finest quality was his strength in character.

However, I was embarrassed and pained by the President's whining about how hard his job is. Yes, his job is difficult, but he makes it even harder by not doing it well.

President Bush has not managed to capture Osama Bin Laden, win the peace in Iraq, balance the budget, help the environment, increase jobs, or improve our standing in the world. I hope Oregonians toss him out of office this fall and let's get the country back on track.

William Rexford

* * *

To the Editor:

Every week I look forward to your letters. It's wonderful to see such passion among your readers. A lot of the letters are entertaining and educational.

I would like to correct Carey Tosello's letter in regards to Wal-Mart (The Nugget, September 29). Wal-Mart currently has 92 supercenters located in Germany. Wal-Mart has also opened stores in China, Brazil, United Kingdom, Mexico, Korea, Argetina and Canada.

Although they may not carry all the American products we've come to know and enjoy, they have a strong American influence. They are expanding into other countries and will continue. They could be negotiating a deal with Japan, India or Indonesia right now for all we know. It's only a matter of time before Wal-Mart becomes a household name in the world.

Kris Strack

* * *

To the Editor:

Recently Jonathan Alter of Newsweek wrote that Americans are in denial about a new draft. John Kerry has pointed out that by extending tours of duty of Reserves and National Guards as well as regular Army troops, the Bush Administration has created a "back door draft."

If the U.S. is to meet all its obligations to police and democratize the world, we don't have nearly enough troops to accomplish this.

A draft is a reasonable solution and one I support.

When I graduated from high school in 1957 all 18-year-old males who weren't 4F faced a military obligation that could be met in a variety of ways. I chose a three-year enlistment over the two-year draft because I wouldn't have to spend a year in the Active Reserves.

But at that time it wasn't difficult to avoid the draft and military service altogether. There were many types of deferments. You could marry and have children, which many guys I knew did. You could go to college, which I couldn't afford to do at the time. Or you could get a farm deferment or another "vital" occupational deferment such as professional sports.

The result of this policy was the unintended consequence that the Army became populated by a majority of those in the lower-middle to lower end of the economic scale.

This was why the majority of the troops who fought in Vietnam came from these disadvantaged economic classes. (John Kerry being one notable exception).

If the draft is reinstated we could rectify this inequity quite easily and still base the draft on economics. Only this time, those from the wealthiest families would be drafted first and barred from deferments. After all they have the largest stake in society, the most to gain and the most to lose should our country ever be conquered by a fearsome enemy like Iraq.

Had such a system been in place during the Vietnam War, draft dodgers like Cheney and Bush would have had to participate in a war they supported but were too cowardly to fight in.

R.T.Tihista

* * *

To the Editor:

As I understand the law, soldiers of every rank are required to disobey illegal orders.

There is debate whether or not the U.S. invasion of Iraq is legal, whether it may even involve war crimes. Under such controversial circumstances, we shouldn't be surprised that some soldiers are questioning, and even disobeying, orders to fight in that war. I think they deserve our compassion and understanding, not our condemnation.

In the future, when we're looking back on this invasion, its consequences and its questionable legality, those troops who refused orders to fight, those who didn't turn up for their shipments to Iraq, those officers who refused to continue sending their men and women into harm's way for a dubious cause, just might be called heroes.

World opinion and the World Court might decide that their disobedience helped to halt war crimes.

Bill Stevens

* * *

To the Editor:

It has been too long since July 23, when Jim passed away. I feel I should have written this long ago, to say thank you to all the many people who have made a circle of love around me and my family.

Today I attended a memorial at the Cloverdale fire department.

It was the most beautiful service I have ever attended. I wish to give a special thanks to all the firemen and their families for this special event.

God bless you all.

With love, Sammy Corfield