Letters to the Editor 10/25/2006

To the Editor:

Last week, you probably received a hefty Voters' Pamphlet that outlines ten state-wide measures that will appear on the ballot this election cycle. If you managed to wade through the legal text and polarized arguments for and against the various measures, you still missed discussion of the impact that two of these measures - 41 and 48 - would have on our local schools here in Sisters.

The cuts we can expect from Measures 41 and 48 are almost 14 percent of the district's total budget. In rough terms, this reduction is equivalent to what our district currently spends to educate our kindergarten, first and second grade students combined.

Measure 41 essentially allows taxpayers to use the total of their federal tax deduction exemptions on their Oregon tax returns. It may reduce the state tax your household pays; it definitely reduces the state's revenue. Measure 48 doesn't directly reduce anyone's taxes, but it does impose constitutional limits on state spending.

The non-partisan Financial Impact Committee (composed of the Secretary of State, State Treasurer, Director of the Department of Administrative Services, Director of the Department of Revenue and a local government representative) has estimated the impact that these two measures would have on the state's general fund spending. At the bottom line, the committee estimates that general fund spending would be reduced by $1.0B in the 2005-07 biennium and $2.8B in the 2007-09 biennium.

That's $2.8B as in Billion.

Using today's ratios for distributing state spending to schools and for allocating the State Schools Fund to our district, this level of state-wide reductions equates to cuts at the Sisters schools of $1.05M in the current biennium, and $2.96M in 2007-09.

To understand the local impact of these reductions, recall that the current Sisters School District budget is based on total revenues of $10.9M. Given recent growth rates in our local enrollment and in the state-wide Schools Fund, Measures 41 and 48 would force cuts of almost 14 percent from the district budget for our next school year.

I plan to use my vote to support Sisters school children by voting against Measures 41 and 48.

Rob Corrigan

s s s

To the Editor:

I have never voted against any public money measure until now. I am, however, voting against the sheriff's ballot measures 9-40 and 9-41.

Why? I believe that taxation should have a high correlation with services rendered. That does not appear to be the case with these measures.

When I was on the Tollgate board, I repeatedly attempted to secure the sheriff's department's help in reducing vehicular speed in our area. Each time the response was something like this: "Sorry... private roads... can't help you!"

I know that other area subdivisions receive the same response.

Could careless driving citations be issued? I believe so, but they are not. Even the presence of a patrol car a couple of times a day would be helpful. As it is, patrols are so infrequent that when I spot one, I tend to wonder what's going on!

Now, I understand that these levies are also for jails, detectives, forensics and other needs. But I believe that making our local roads safe is still imperative.

Tollgate residents and those of similar subdivisions are being asked to contribute a lot of money toward public safety. We are not exactly teeming with crime, but we would appreciate being noticed.

With empty lots selling for $250,000-$300,000 it's a good bet that our 440 properties have a mean valuation of $300,000, or soon will have. Therefore, at the maximum tax rate for these measures, more than $350,000 per year will be raised in Tollgate alone.

Is it too much to ask for a bit more help than a once-a-week drive through?

If I'm wrong, convince me quickly; I don't like voting no on public safety!

Steve Mathews

s s s

To the Editor:

I am writing to urge Sisters' residents to vote for Bill Merrill for election to the Sisters City Council.

Sisters is lucky to have such a qualified candidate running. I served with Bill on the city's SDC (systems development charges) Advisory Committee. I was impressed by how he came to meetings prepared with research on best practices from other cities that were relevant to Sisters. He approached problems with an open mind, gathered information, made up his mind, then persuaded others of the value of his proposals. Our committee adopted nearly all of his recommendations, which were fair to all parties.

Second, he will listen. In a recent candidates' forum, Bill acknowledged he's not an expert on all matters facing the city. He's prepared to hear multiple views, to "sit down and have coffee" with anybody to find the best answers. His proposal to form a Citizens Advisory Committee to gather ideas on the big decisions facing Sisters is a refreshing change from the current council's approach - lamenting poor public participation, then ignoring strong public opinion when it's inconvenient to one's views.

Third, Bill is a natural leader. His ideas for addressing traffic problems are measured, sensible and cost-conscious. It's difficult to imagine Bill letting an issue important to constituents languish and go unaddressed. We could be confident he would lead rather than react, be candid rather than vague or vacillating.

I believe he is more qualified than several of the other candidates to sit on the city council. Bill has deep knowledge of local issues from his work on the Sisters Urban Area Planning Commission, the budget committee and the comprehensive plan revision. He had 29 years' experience in the U.S. Army, much of that in logistics management. He holds a bachelor's degree in resource management from OSU and a master's in logistics management.

As a retiree, Bill has no reason to pander to any particular constituency. He has no potential conflicts of interest on development or other issues and seems motivated by a desire to serve the public. Like Sharlene Weed, I think Bill would work hard to keep Sisters from losing the great community spirit and ambiance that we all treasure.

If you're looking for a smart, independent thinker who is up to speed on Sisters' most pressing challenges, vote for Bill Merrill.

Merry Ann Moore

s s s

To the Editor;

I would like to enthusiastically endorse Tammy Baney in her candidacy for the County Commissioner Position No. 3.

I have served with Tammy on the Board of Deschutes County Commission on Children and Families. Serving on this Commission as Sisters' representative for the past six years has been an enlightening experience and a real observation on how the county and the state governments work. Through this I have had many opportunities to observe Tammy at work and have always been impressed with her abilities.

Tammy is the present chair of this all-lay board. She brings a very thoughtful insight to the challenges of coping with underfunding by Federal, State, and County Governments and the needs of the children and their families and of the many agencies, supporting those in the fastest growing communities of Oregon.

Tammy brings patience, understanding, enthusiasm and good humor to the table to get things done with a surprising amount of efficiency. She has come to know, and has earned the respect of both the elected officials and of those on the staff of both the county and state governments. She brings a diverse background and a wealth of valuable knowledge to achieve real results for her efforts.

Please vote for Tammy Baney for county commissioner. We need her in county government!

Ted Jones

s s s

To the Editor:

We've all read articles about how low the unemployment rate is here in Central Oregon. Articles about how difficult it is for employers to find employees. As a longtime resident (and someone in the hunt right now for a new position) let me give employers a constructive word of advice:

When a prospective employee contacts you seeking employment, regardless of that person's candidacy for a position, respond to that person in some fashion within 24-48 hours. This is "professionalism 101."

You need to understand that every person who contacts your company is a consumer. They form impressions and opinions about your company based on their experiences with you. And "word of mouth" advertising (the most efficient by the way) can be very positive - or very negative.

By not communicating with prospective employees you are sending them a very clear message - their contact with you is not important. The result: lost business and poor brand image.

Bill Mintiens

s s s

To the Editor:

This letter is directed at the individual or individuals whose actions resulted in the cancellation of the elementary school's fund-raiser plans this year.

We hope you think twice before launching such a crusade again.

The SPTC was excited about our plans, which included partnering with local company, Buckboard Provisioning Company, to benefit both the elementary school and the local Sisters community. Buckboard Provisioning's fund-raising products and program are unique - healthier foods, gift item options, local history and an incentive program that teaches our children about teamwork and common goals, not plastic toys that break.

There is a forum to express concerns or complaints about planned SPTC activities, and you would have been welcome to express your concerns at an SPTC meeting or directly to one of the SPTC Board Members - the Future Fair was not the appropriate forum.

Concerns were raised about potential conflicts of interest, yet those concerns were addressed last spring with the school superintendent. You apparently represented yourself as speaking on behalf of the entire SPTC - let us be clear that was not the case.

The way you went about getting your point across was unprofessional and quite honestly has been viewed by many as petty. These actions have jeopardized successful fund-raising to benefit our children. Wasn't the Future Fair about developing the future of our community? Doesn't that include supporting local businesses who invest their earnings back into our local economy for the good of our students and community, as opposed to companies who don't?

Everyone has a right to express their opinions. However, this approach was wrong.

Ilene Wells

Daiya Dillman-Owen

s s s

To the Editor:

We are in opposition to the widening of the highway between Suttle Lake and Sisters. We commute this road weekly in all seasons. The problem is not with access to passing lanes, rather with people who drive recklessly as a norm.

A passing lane(s) will not change people's poor driving habits/judgment or "reduce tension." Providing additional areas where speeds can be increased, will actually have the opposite affect. During the snow season this will be especially noted. Inexperienced drivers, and drivers from out of the area who do not know the road well, often have a false sense of security in their four-wheel-drive rigs and use poor judgment!

In addition, a great deal of wildlife cross this stretch and would not only be in greater danger while migrating, would endanger the traffic, driving at a higher rate of speed. Please DO NOT construct additonal passing lanes in this stretch, either east or west bound.

Wiley and Beth Campbell

s s s

To the Editor:

Remember when Democrats were not labeled as gay-loving porn-pushers and anti-marriage? Anyone remember when Republicans weren't considered right wing religious fanatics with expansionist capitalist war mongering ideals?

Think back to the time when Democrats were the party that believed in sharing the wealth and Republicans believed in conserving the wealth so this country could be strong in the world.

I am so sick of the name calling. If you consider yourself a family values voter, consider this: Since Reagan passed the Freedom of Information Act, three megacorporations have bought up most of our radio and television stations and I'll tell you a little secret; these corporations have a bottom line and it isn't about being liberal or conservative - it's about making a buck.

The more sensational the topic, the more attention it gets. If it's gritty and seedy, well, all the better. If talk show hosts yell at each other, that's entertainment folks. The media has vast portions of our population living in a flight-or-fight mode, which is unhealthy. And it's all about money.

Instead of paying attention to what's really going on in Iraq we're sideswiped again by another messy sex scandal (Foley) because it's more personal, more sleazy, and the ratings go up. Yuck.

Don't let the media label your friends and neighbors as the enemy. That Republican capitalist Christian might be the one who privately gives to your son or daughter's scholarship fund. The Democrat next door just might have won a Purple Heart in another war.

If you don't like the direction this country is headed, please turn off the corporate-media megaphone that caters to our escapist addictions and do the research.

Find candidates that don't blame the other party for mistakes, but have real plans for dealing with the huge problems this nation will have to face in the next two years. Vote!

Brenda Smith

Registered Independent

s s s

To the Editor:

The Iraq war (which Democrats also voted to support, based on the same intelligence relied upon by the Administration) is not something we turn a blind eye to. How could anybody be complacent or uncaring about war and the resulting death and destruction?

On the other hand, engaging in it is sometimes necessary. Where would we be if brave men had not fought for our freedom and security in past wars? Should we just sit back and allow despots and terrorists to take over, murdering millions in their zeal for power? Admittedly, an enemy who feels it is an honor to die to kill us and who murders his own countrymen because of religious and ethnic differences, is difficult to fight. But what is the alternative? There comes a point when peace talks are no longer effective.

I wonder what the public opinion of the war would be if we were told on the evening news the whole story - of all the good our soldiers are doing over there. I wonder what the opinion would be of abortion if we were given a daily count of the thousands of innocent babies who die each day, 95 percent being done for the convenience of the father and/or mother.

Do you think God approves of the willful destruction of these, who are so "fearfully and wonderfully made"? (Psalm 139:14-16)

My point two weeks ago was to point out the hypocrisy of the Democratic leadership in pointing fingers when they have as much or more of the same vices in their own ranks. I know there are many good, moral people who have been lifelong Democrats, including my husband. We don't agree with everything President Bush has done, but the points where we disagree are on some issues where he seems to be in step with the Democratic agenda.

Our votes will always go to the candidates who respect human life of any age, support the traditional family as the basis and best interest of our society, and support American sovereignty and the preservation of the freedoms that many lives were given for and are granted by our Constitution.

Lorene Richardson

s s s

To the Editor:

Are videotaped beheadings covered by the Geneva conventions? Now at Guantanamo, Khalid Sheik Mohammed, mastermind of the 9/11 attacks, the beheading of Daniel Pearl and other atrocities can have his military tribunal.

We should not treat terrorist enemy combatants as if they were American citizens accused of crimes with full access to classified information against them and a list of the undercover agents involved in their capture.

The New York Times states "the Geneva conventions protect Americans; if this country changes the rules, it's changing the rules for Americans taken prisoner abroad."

The New York Times seems to omit the two soldiers (one from Oregon) tortured with drills, one beheaded after Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, leader of al Qaeda in Iraq was killed in combat.

The idea that we can impress the enemy with our magnanimity is false. Being "nice" to enemies has never worked, no matter how many times liberals make us do it. It did not work with the Soviet Union, Imperial Japan, Hitler or the North Vietnamese - enemies capable of being more civilized than the Islamic jihadists who started this war with us.

U.S. senator John McCain was not accorded the Geneva Conventions while being tortured at the Hanoi Hilton!

History seems to begin each morning for the cut-and-run advocates. Perhaps that's why they keep whining the idea that has never worked: "Be nice to our enemies and they will reward us with good behavior."

Steve Coltin