Letters to the Editor 11/06/2013

To the Editor:

I'd like to take the opportunity to respond to the two letters that disagreed with my opinion appearing in The Nugget on October 23, just to stay accurate.

To Mr. Addison:

You are correct, Mr. Benson stated that the 100 flight figure was an error and was based upon a misinterpretation. That was one of several statements made by Mr. Benson to the planning commission that evening that proved to be untrue. Mr. Benson is quoted in The Nugget (8-21-12) stating he foresees 100 flights on a weekend. On his application to the state for the $600,000 he received from taxpayers to improve his private runway, he listed 120 flights on a weekend. Those are Mr. Benson's numbers.

To Mr. Lansburgh:

I never said the recent plane crash was the fault of the airport. I believe that this airport is located in an area close to homes, schools, public buildings as well as downtown Sisters. I have been told that it is a difficult airport for pilots because of the necessity to land at very low altitude directly over a busy street (Camp Polk) and the many nearby trees.

I am not against high school students learning to fly. I believe Redmond or Bend might be a better location. I taught both my kids to drive. I didn't take them to a busy downtown area or other difficult area while they first learned. I think that might be a consideration for flight instruction also, but that is my opinion, you are entitled to yours.

The residents of Sisters voted for what they were told about the annexation. I believe that Sisters is a community, whether we live inside the city limits or outside.

Mayor Boyd and the city council, at a council meeting, totally ignored those concerned with this issue; treating them with disrespect by joking with Benson as residents voiced concerns that were important to them.

The real issue here is that others from the community that were being adversely affected had no notification of the process by either the city or even worse by Alan Unger (county commissioner) who represents them. The process was kept hidden, and that is wrong.

Bob Norman

s s s

To the Editor:

A forest roads analysis discussion, and noticeable changes to forest trails surrounding the community of Crossroads, prompted many months of forest-trail-related concerns.

It was perplexing to understand how and why Crossroads was not aware of the extent and advanced progression of this trail project, (the Crossroads board was told in September 2012 they had time to take this project to their community, as it was premature, that without funding there was no trail project).

Much written documentation and information was gathered, providing a chronological timeline which could prompt the question, "Which came first, the chicken or the egg."

One document provided was a letter from the USFS dated March 20, 2012 giving the "interested public" opportunity to understand the trail process. The Crossroads Property Owners Association did not receive this letter. (Note that the Tollgate community was among the 753 letters sent).

Crossroads residents chose to buy their properties and live in the forest 24/7, 52 weeks a year, to enjoy its solitude, beauty, tranquility and pleasures. That should have qualified Crossroads residents as "interested public."

Meetings at SPRD and letters to The Nugget have provided many opinions, contributing to the growing confusion and controversy between neighbors; those for paved trails, and those who are opposed to trail improvement, and upsetting those who just want to live peacefully on their private property.

On September 3, the district ranger held a meeting where many trail project or grant fund supporters met to discuss the possible need for an All Community Trails Meeting.

It is time to stop the madness. This is still Sisters. Let's not follow the path of special-interest politics seen in our nation's capital; take the trails issue to a special election, (including voters in the sphere of influence) if necessary. It would probably take an hour out of someone's day to count the votes.

Let's act in good faith and with good character to proactively find a neutral common ground, and negotiate for a positive clear transparent resolution to this trails project.

Bill Anttila