Letters to the Editor 04/29/2015

To the Editor:

In view of the letters on the roundabout I think certain observations are necessary.

From a letter April 15 by Steve Allely:

"...if a roundabout is installed I can guarantee some unaware trucker is going to plow straight through in the middle of some dark night..." You guarantee? Truckers would be that careless?

In the same letter "I don't know of any trucker or hauler who thinks this is a good idea." To make this statement objective, one would have to give the names of the truckers as well as the type of rig they are driving (large pickups are not long-haul trucks).

From a letter of April 15 by Thomas Pryor:

"In New Jersey... Even a few decades ago these circles were being decommissioned or modified because of the high rate of accidents." This statement should be provided with verifiable references. Same letter, "looking at Bend's roundabouts on the more heavily used intersections, it is apparent that they are failing and creating long lines during busy times." Do you have objective information comparing some roundabouts with some of Bend's signal intersections?

From a letter from Donna Holland on April 22:

"A roundabout will destroy the ambience and quaintness of Sisters." That is opinion and will be hard to ascertain since the event has not occurred. "I presented my personal survey to ODOT and City officials of 52 businesses I interviewed during the first week in April..." Good for you at least that was an attempt to quantify your opinion. If one is making such a survey, one should reveal the structure of the questions on the survey. Many times surveys are not valid just because of that reason.

From a letter of April 22 by E. Paul Janssen:

"..the incidence of close calls at the Highway 20 and Barclay Road intersection seemed to me to be less with the temporary traffic lights in place." That is certainly true but it does not address what the safety of the intersection may or not be with a roundabout.

While I understand the emotional involvement of writing to express an opinion, the reader should also read the letters with analytical thinking.

B. Graham

•••

To the Editor:

I read with interest the article and letters about the proposed roundabout at Highway 20 and Barclay.

I don't really understand the reasoning behind the letters in favor of a traffic light. It seems to me that safety and efficiency of traffic control and movement would be the highest priorities, with aesthetic appeal being a nice-to-have.

If traffic circles are navigable by trucks - and they certainly are by cars - and they're substantially safer than lights, I'm not sure what the appeal of a traffic light might be. They're also "obeyed" 24 hours a day, where traffic lights have less observance overnight (would we want red-light cameras?). And a roundabout has substantially more aesthetic possibilities than a traffic light.

There seems to be a bit of conspiracy paranoia, with questions of a "done deal," but I think that misses the point of this discussion. The issue is about good public policy - which we want based on experience gained from scientific studies, and not someone's personal opinion.

As for business in Sisters and a truck bypass, I would be much happier walking downtown without breathing clouds of diesel smoke, and there are probably potential visitors who feel the same. If we get roundabouts at Barclay and Locust and trucks out of our core, the loss of some car drivers who would take a bypass would be balanced against the improved pedestrian experience and more positive attitude of visitors who choose to see what we have.

And aren't happy visitors more likely to be customers?

Steve Bryan

•••

To the Editor:

I am very concerned with the safety of our high school drivers in regards to the proposed roundabout on a major interstate [sic]. I love roundabouts but not on a major interstate [sic]!

This will surprise and confuse tourists entering our town along with intersecting with a road that young drivers use up to three times a day. I just don't buy into the safety studies after hearing all of the safety studies of back-in parking and seeing the results of that poor choice.

I don't understand why officials don't choose the easiest, safest and most cost-effective system. That traffic light should have never been taken down.

Please let the locals vote on this important matter!

Shirley McBride

•••

To the Editor:

As the former owners of Camp Tamarack, we encourage everyone who has experienced outdoor school, or had a child attend one, contact our state legislators with support for House Bill 2648 and Senate Bill 439. Both of these support Outdoor school for all students. Passing them would provide every fifth- or sixth-grader in the state with the opportunity for a full week of Outdoor school or a comparable outdoor education experience that meets local needs and conditions.

The Sisters School District has a long history of participating in Outdoor school. However, that is not the case for all districts. Today, approximately 50 percent of Oregon's fifth- and sixth-graders are denied the opportunity to experience Outdoor school. Only five of Oregon's 36 counties report 100 percent Outdoor school program participation, four counties report no participation at all and eight counties report less than 20 percent student participation.

It has long been recognized that hands-on experiences such as outdoor school teach collaboration and community-building skills, build self-sufficiency and leadership skills, and drive interest in science, technology, and natural resources. All of these help to alleviate the achievement gap in schools, one of the blights on our Oregon education system. Passing either of these bills will provide students with hands-on learning that helps them understand the world through their local communities, connect with their peers, and discover valuable information about themselves.

A solid-waste fee and unclaimed bottle-deposit fund have been targeted as possible funding avenues, both of which stay away from dollars already earmarked for education.

Having seen first-hand the value of Outdoor school, we strongly urge you to contact our legislators ASAP, imploring them to support this valuable legislation. ([email protected] and [email protected]).

Edie and Ted Jones

•••

To the Editor:

We want to personally thank all the property owners in the Cloverdale Rural Fire Protection District who, by a strong majority, supported our recent request for a much-needed bond measure.

We will continue to work with the fire chief and volunteer staff as a team to manage a solid plan that will move the district forward in a fiscally responsible manner for the next 20 years of operations.

Every dollar that we requested in the bond levy was carefully considered in the overall plan that was submitted for your approval. We only asked for the required expenditures to address critical issues that have affected our operations. We, as current members of your district board of directors, take your support very seriously, and every decision that we make is ruled by a majority vote of all five members present at an authorized meeting. We may not all agree on an issue, but once a vote has been made all members should support the decision.

Our board meetings are open to the public and advertised in public notices. We urge anyone in the district to attend if they have any questions or concerns as to how the district is being managed.

The district has come a long way since its humble beginning some 50 years ago, and many teams have been responsible for bringing us to this point in time.

It has truly been our pleasure to serve on your board of directors for the past four years, and three of us must now ask for your vote for our re-election so that we, as dedicated members of a proven team, may continue to serve you for another four years.

Jerry B. Johnson, current board president

John Thomas, current board secretary/treasurer

Tom Barrier, current board director

•••

To the Editor:

As a former captain in the Cloverdale Fire District and a 22-year resident in the Cloverdale area, I have seen the Cloverdale Fire District progress from a colloquial organization into a capable professional operational department the residents can depend on.

With Jerry Johnson, John Thomas, Tom Barrier and Cindy Kettering on the Board of Directors, the Cloverdale Fire District has continued to advance in their fire protection and emergency medical service capabilities.

The Cloverdale residents can be secure in their trust of the fire district personnels' ability to provide exceptional service in times of need. It was under the direction and support of these directors that the district bond measure was developed and brought to fruition. With their vision and leadership, the Cloverdale Fire District is moving forward to design and build new fire apparatus and equipment facilities to provide the proactive services the residents expect and deserve from their fire district.

The terms on the board for Jerry, John and Tom are coming up for renewal. I therefore strongly recommend the residents of the Cloverdale Rural Fire Protection District vote to return Jerry Johnson, John Thomas and Tom Barrier to the board of directors in this upcoming election. Their experience, knowledge and understanding of the district, its changing population and the requirements therein necessitate you voting for their continuation on the board of directors.

David Hiller

•••

To the Editor:

My name is Rob Malone; I am running for the position of director for the Cloverdale Rural Fire Protection District.

I and my family have been members of the Sisters Country Community for more than 15 years. I decided to run following the passage of the bond measure for new equipment and facilities as I feel strongly taxpayer money should be shepherded well. I did a little homework and found what, perhaps, is an insufficient level of oversight by the board as it relates to significant monetary decisions.

I watched the new offices at the end of Cloverdale Road being constructed, when the foundation was built and then torn out I asked what happened, I was told due to ADA restrictions and available land the first foundation was not going to work. Had there been proper oversight, this issue should not have been a problem and were it not for generous community members donating time and equipment there would have been a significant cost overrun.

A few years ago, the district purchased a piece of equipment for $100,000. In the current budget that unit is to be surplused and re-sold for something between $50,000 and $80,000. For a district the size of Cloverdale to take even a $20,000 loss in only two or three years, to me, is quite concerning.

Following the passage of the bond measure, the board approved the spending of $800,000 for new engines without actually knowing what the specifications of those engines would be. I attended the most recent board meeting in which the plans for the new facilities were presented to the board for the first time - and approved within 20 minutes of being presented. I have been involved in hundreds of construction projects over the years and can tell you the speed with which these plans were approved is

unheard of.

The volunteers and the constituents deserve thoughtful consideration, critical thinking and vigorous discussion when significant financial decisions are made. I don't believe that is currently the case and would urge you to check into it for yourself. If elected I will assist in providing those things to the process to ensure the best, most appropriate decisions are made going forward.

Rob Malone

•••

To the Editor:

As a former decade-long director of the Cloverdale Fire District, I have the utmost respect for the members and volunteers of the district. A volunteer fire district is difficult to staff, and Cloverdale has managed to accomplish that for decades through the dedication of the men and women of the district. I also believe the chief has done a good job of managing the daily operations of the district and brought forward many needed changes during his tenure as chief.

That said, the district is facing a challenge that it has not previously undertaken and I'm afraid the lack of experience is showing. As the residents of the district know, a bond was recently passed for $2.475 million to do significant upgrades and improvements to facilities and apparatus. Managing those funds and improvement projects will be a significant task. The strain has already shown itself through lack of oversight and mismanagement.

Questions: Why is the Sisters Rodeo Association willing to spend money to move and salvage a structure that Cloverdale Fire District was not willing to salvage? Why did the new building foundation of Station 602 have to be torn out and re-poured, likely at taxpayer expense? Why are new engines being purchased, while a newly purchased engine is being surplussed at a likely $50,000 loss.

A truly functional board of directors employs group process to make better decisions. The board thrives on difference of opinion and takes in information from many different sources and life experiences to arrive at a better decision than individuals can make on their own. For the first time in a number of years the voters have a choice of candidates willing to offer their experience and opinion to help create a more well-rounded board.

I would encourage the voters not to vote for specific candidates, but to talk to the incumbents and candidates and ask how we got to where we are now; what do they plan to do to keep the district on track; and who is watching the $2.745 million (plus 20 years of interest) to assure that it is wisely spent.

Todd Williver