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 Unpublished items are not acknowledged or returned.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:

When an international giant such as McDonald's Corporation sees an opportunity to tap a market share of the food dollar in Sisters, it makes me kind of queasy.

McDonald's is willing to use the enthusiasm and good will and capital of local people in order to position themselves largely in front of every hungry person who comes to this town of 1,080 so that they can take that market share from the small restaurants and cafes that presently serve and truly characterize Sisters.

To argue that it will bring the benefit of cheap fast food to Sisters is to ignore the long-term effect of granting access to any large corporation with sufficient resolve and working capital to comply with enough of the rules to get themselves planted in yet another sweet little town.

Each concession made establishes a stronger precedent for others to follow until one day we wake up and -- where did Sisters go?? We are not and should not become just another common, dumpy place by the highway with fast-food in and fast-food out and a downtown that has lost its grace and personality because it couldn't find a way to say no to the big corporate franchises.

We actually have zoning ordinances we can and should use to protect us from exploitive development and the planning commission and the city council need support to uphold and even strengthen solid, clear, fair rules so that they can act in the best interests of the town when a proposal such as this comes about.

The pressure is on, however, as witnessed at last week's planning commission meeting where the decision to accept was made by just three people, two of whom seemed to me to be skeptical. The lone dissenting vote by Kevin Miller gave hope to a group of citizens who have filed an appeal, which I think is a good and brave idea.

Permitting McDonald's a place in Sisters would create an impact on our community that I feel we would soon regret. I don't see it as progress.

Melissa Ward

* * *

To the Editor:

The "McDonaldization of Society" (George Ritzer), has just hit home and is becoming the McDonaldization of Sisters.

There are so many reasons for not wanting this invasion of fast food to arrive. Demographically there are no towns or cities that only have McDonald's. They are simply the pioneer that comes in first, paving the way for Burger King, Taco Bell and the like to follow.

They contribute greatly to the destruction of the Earth. Over 72 percent of the cleared rainforest lands are used to provide American fast food restaurants with their cattle ranching land (Toni D. Howard, Stanford.edu). Also meaning pre-fabricated frozen beef patties shipped long distances only to be reheated and stuck on pasty white buns and sold for too much money.

Whatever the reason for disliking McDonald's, one thing is very clear; they do not belong in this town, nor do any of the other fast food chains that are surely going to follow suit once they have paved the way.

We still have a chance to stop this from happening to Sisters. An appeal has been filed. Meaning the green light to development has not yet been given. It is clear that this McDonald's and gas station will be two different facilities within 400 feet of one another each being a drive-thru, which is against city codes.

As well, a drive-thru for a restaurant is only to be an accessory to a business. However, with McDonald's it provides over 60 percent of their business (wifinetnews.com), another breach in the city codes.

So let them hear us speak out against this; we still have a chance. Too much time and energy has gone into the development and maintenance of this town to just let it go to fast food now. We have a responsibility to preserve the beauty and originality of Sisters, providing people with a place to go that is a little bit different than the rest of the world.

Melody Shindler

* * *

To the Editor,

Having lived here for 11 years, the thought of a McDonald's does not in any way threaten my sense of where I live, or the future of this community.

I have first-hand experience of the benefits that McDonald's can bring to a community.

I spent the first two weeks of my daughter's life at the Ronald McDonald House in Bend due to her being in the St. Charles NICU. It was a godsend that we had that facility to stay at for an extended time and not have to pay out an arm and a leg.

Ronald McDonald houses are largely funded by McDonald's and provide a service for families in need. In my opinion the benefits and the money McDonald's could bring into the community outweigh the threat of the Golden Arches at the edge of town.

Marilyn Cornelius

* * *

To the Editor:

Having trouble guiding your car in a straight line on many of our highways? Does it tend to wander? Does it lurch when changing lanes? Troubled by the spray out of the ruts when they are full of water? Does the road rumble make you irritated? You are a victim of studded tires!

The University of Alaska Engineering Department did a study in 1995 in which all variables were controlled to compare studded tires to snow tires. It controlled the condition of the surface, the type of vehicle, the kind of tires, and did each test in the same weather. The cars used were a front wheel drive sedan, a rear wheel drive sedan, a pickup, and a 4-wheel-drive SUV.

The tires used were all-season, summer tires, snow tires, and studded tires. They tested ice conditions, new snow conditions, packed snow conditions and dry pavement. The tests included stopping, hill climbing and cornering.

The tests revealed that the snow tires were superior or equal to studded tires in every case except on polished ice at 32 degrees. In colder ice conditions the studs did not grip as well as the snow tire. The all season tires on the SUV were even superior to the studded tires in many of the conditions.

Also very revealing was that studded tires lose half of their effectiveness after only 1,000 miles, while snow tires did not lose their effectiveness as quickly.

The stopping distance on dry pavement for studded tires may be as much as 46 percent more than snow tires.

Since the State of Washington documented that on their mountain pass roads only 9 days on average have any ice at all, and our passes are not any more winter bound, it seems that there is no necessity for studded tires.

The State of Oregon estimates that $11 million is spent each year to try to keep up to the damage that studded tires do to our roads. Therefore I ask those who have to make a choice this year to choose snow tires over studded tires.

B. Graham

* * *

To the Editor:

I have been reading every issue of The Nugget and have read back issues available on the internet. As a recent property owner I am concerned that Sisters is on the verge of destroying what makes the city so attractive in being a tourist attraction and its uniqueness in being a small town.

With all the discussion and planning for UGB (Urban Growth Boundary), care must be taken to not become another Bend or Redmond.

I won't be surprised to soon read about plans to bring a box store to town. I love Costco and Home Depot and don't mind driving to Redmond for what they have to offer. We don't need them here. Bigness is not better!

Vern Renner

* * *

To the Editor:

Words cannot express the extent of our thanks to so many people in this community who came to our aid during our time of great loss.

Trish' s death impacted us so deeply. With the love and support of friends, family and even some we didn't know, we realize that, while difficult, we will carry on through this rough time.

In particular, Kelsey and I would like to thank Charles Price, The Sisters Outlaws volleyball team, Molly VanAcker, Shannon Peters, Sally Taylor-Pillar, Diane McClain, Anne Williams, Bill & Jan Reed, Donna Moyer, Connie & Doug Holly, Officer Hernandez, David and Diane Jenkins/Lozito and the family at United Airlines for all they have done for us; everything from cooking meals, writing notes, driving all over Oregon and just being there to talk.

Of course there are many more people who gave their time, their prayers and their friendship to us during this challenging period of our lives. While losing such an incredible wife and mother is very painful, we are sustained by the warmth of the people of this community.

Thank you.

Dave & Kelsey Gillespie

* * *

To the Editor:

Even though it will be moot when this letter is printed, I feel I have to respond to the guest columnists the Pretes regarding Measure 37.

It is easy to feel sympathy with the Pretes. At the same time, they should have known that they had no guarantee to build on their property. My husband and I had nearly identical circumstances in the early 1990s when we decided to buy property for future retirement in the Sisters area.

We considered buying a piece that we were told by both the Realtor and Deschutes County was not guaranteed a building permit without going through other risky processes. We decided not to buy this property and, instead, purchased a piece where a building permit could be issued.

We gamble with the stock market, in Las Vegas, with buying cars. We do not expect the government to bail us out. We shouldn't expect the government to bail us out of risky decisions we make about buying property.

Linda Davis