Letters to the Editor 09/26/2007

To the Editor:

With all due respect to Mr. Morgan, it seems he is doing more damage than good in our school district. Even if he "wins" in his efforts in litigation, there must be a better way to effect positive change than his current tactics.

It is hard to imagine how he could have run for the school board and expected to be elected with the way he has handled these important issues. No one likes a bully, Mr. Morgan.

Eric T. Wagner

Editor's note: This letter was originally received as a comment on the article "Schools face ethics query," at http://www.nuggetnews.com.

Mike Morgan's response is below.

•••

To the Editor:

I want to apologize to Mr. Wagner and everyone else in this community for any harsh language that crossed the line of civility. That is not my intent nor is it my intent to impugn the integrity of the individual board members.

I am passionate about what I do and believe and I know they are also. Honest disagreements are bound to occur.

I believe that forces outside of this school district drive much of the current dispute. There can be no doubt that there are many lawyers and lobbyists that work for the public education industry. I think they sometimes go too far to find situations that can be leveraged into new legislation or case law that advance their interests. Sometimes these efforts are at the expense of local interests.

My intent is to stimulate public participation and oversight of our public schools. There are very few people that go to board meetings, ask hard questions and demand accountability from elected officials.

Every citizen has the right to use government resources to enforce current law or to effect change. I received more than 30 percent of the vote in the last election so there are more than a few people that agreed with me on the issues that I advanced.

I have taken this dispute to the courts and to government regulators because I am passionate about education. How can citizens provide oversight when administrators and elected officials violate public meeting law?

I spent 35 years in the electronics industry. Most of that was in Silicon Valley. It upsets me to see our high-paying/high-tech jobs going elsewhere. I want our current kids to have the same opportunities that I had. That demands we pay attention to what our schools are doing.

If there is a better way as Mr. Wagner suggests, what is it?

Mike Morgan

•••

To the Editor:

In regards to Sharri Bertagna's letter: I think the people of Sisters do communicate and they do have their facts straight. I also know that the people of Sisters indeed do support their town.

As far as the "people who run it," (I assume you mean City Hall) they need to listen to what is being said in these letters! There are obviously some serious issues to deal with. If there are so many people "trashing" city employees, maybe it's time for these employees to resign. They must not be doing their job of "serving the people" if so many opinions are to the contrary.

I'm so sorry Gary Frazee has been pushed to make this decision so close to retirement. The letter writers that you claim are crazy and don't have their facts straight know Gary well enough to know that something dire caused this result.

I think the time is long overdue to make some changes. Sisters is a positive place, and City Hall should reflect that.

Susan McGinnis

•••

To the Editor:

Hats off to the new recycle center in Sisters!

I wanted to attend the official opening of the new center but had to leave town that day so I couldn't attend. As one of the "squeaky wheel" vocal residents who has lived next to the old location of the recycle center for years, I and the other local residents are very happy to see it finally become a reality.

Thanks, City of Sisters, for finally doing this.

I firmly believe in recycling, but the increasing abuse by uncaring, narcissistic slobs over the recent years made living next to it almost unbearable at times. Now that there are regular hours and regulations in place along with it being manned by the county, the garbage, illegal material dumping, and after hours dead-of-night noisy deposits have finally come to an end.

I must say the resulting peace and quiet has been and continues to be wonderful! We had forgotten what it sounds like. Thanks so much again!

Steve Allely

•••

To the Editor:

Horse riders who have shared trails from Sisters to the Harrington Loop area learned this year that they are banned from these trails by a bicycle riding group.

Apparently, this group was given "control" of this huge segment of public forest many years ago by the USFS. A Forest Service official admitted that there were no public hearings regarding this exclusionary control by a special interest group; thus, there was no opportunity for horse people to voice objections over this.

I have been riding these trails from town to the rodeo grounds for 25 years. Hundreds of riders from the Harrington Loop area have ridden most of these same trails for that long and longer. The trails were mostly old forest roads shared by pedestrians, horse and (a few) bike riders and even a few motorized vehicles.

We all appreciated having an interesting variety of terrain and beauty without having to haul a trailer or drive to forest access from Sisters. We all got along well, visiting while we took breaks on the journey, just as we all continue to do on other public lands.

Now, a community that "brands" itself as Western finds the primary symbol of the West kicked off public land that borders the town. Smacks a bit of hypocrisy. Whatever the problems that bike riders may claim, everyone else with whom I have shared conversations about this issue finds it unfair and not justifiable.

Many walkers of these trails have told harrowing stories of bikes nearly running them down from blind corners and a lack of respect for shared space. A system that worked during my quarter century of experience was not in need of change, exclusion and special interest control.

Many horse riders wonder why it did and why "ownership" of public land was transferred to one type of forest user.

Bonnie Malone

•••

To the Editor:

The people of Oregon (and the whole country, as a matter of fact) need to continually be aware of what is happening, educate ourselves, and act to counter what our supposed "representatives" are doing to thwart the will of the people.

Though the people voted in 2004 that marriage is to be between one man and one woman, our legislature and governor have created marriage by another name for two men or two women, giving it all the same rights and privileges of marriage.

This bill is to take effect January 1, 2008, along with another one they have tried to push through without the people being aware of it that gives special rights to all gender confused people while taking away the rights of those of us who disagree. A petition drive has been underway to put these measures to a vote of the people, which would occur in the November, 2008 election.

Likewise, the people passed Measure 37 to protect private property rights and prevent what amounts to "taking" of property through regulations created by unelected officials. However, a partisan group of legislators put together HB 3540 (Measure 49) that will repeal Measure 37.

They didn't intend to put this to a vote of the people either, except one legislator voted for it on condition that it be put on the ballot. A neutral ballot title, by statute, is to be prepared by the Attorney General. But to avoid this and deceive the people, the legislators made up their own slanted ballot title and even outlawed court review of the language!

If passed, Measure 49 would invalidate all Measure 37 claims in process and make all of them start over again with new fees and regulations that would effectively deny most of them.

Don't be deceived! And please exercise your right and responsibility to vote.

Lorene Richardson