 |
  |
 |
||||||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
||||||||||
|
MARCUS VS. DEMOCRACY I was interested to read last week's cover story (4/1) in which Gary Marcus explained his distrust of county government. State law gives him two choices for obtaining the land use approvals he needs to build his massive power plant near Coburg. The first option is to present the land use questions to the elected government of Lane County, as most developers must do when they seek zoning changes in rural Lane County. The second option is to sidestep our local officials and present the proposal to the unelected Energy Facility Siting Council (EFSC) in Salem. Mr. Marcus chose the second course. You can't blame him. If you were building a plant that would emit 50 to 100 million tons of carbon dioxide over its lifespan, as well as lesser amounts of other pollutants such as nitrogen oxide, arsenic, formaldehyde and mercury, and if you were planning to sell the plant's power to far-flung communities, then you would naturally want to seek approval from unelected officials living in a different airshed. According to last week's article in EW, Marcus believes that EFSC has greater expertise on the questions he otherwise would have presented to the county commissioners. But let's look closely at what these questions really are. The issue that Marcus wrested away from the commissioners is the application of Lane County's land use law to the conversion of farmland to an industrial use. When EFSC officials consider this question, they will need to call up Lane County officials to find out what our land use regulations are. There's no way that EFSC has greater expertise on this issue. Marcus insists that the commissioners don't understand the power industry well enough. But the local power experts are also raising questions about his proposal. EWEB Commissioner Sandra Bishop, a democratically elected official, mentioned in the EW article that "it is a bad idea to build this kind of plant in this location." EWEB Commissioner Dorothy Anderson said at a meeting of the Southeast Neighbors Association that Lane County doesn't need the Coburg power plant, and that EWEB has not made an offer to buy any of its output. I guess Bishop and Anderson can't be trusted either. That's the problem with democratically elected officials. Former Congressman Jim Weaver put it best in a letter he wrote last February. "Marcus [should] take his project before the Lane County Commission. What is he afraid of? If it is not a swindle, then he should not fear the elected representatives of the people." There are places on this earth where you don't have to worry about the nuisance of democracy. The U.S. isn't one of them. The Soviet Union used to build power plants with little popular resistance. Then again, the Soviet Union built Chernobyl. The phrase "power to the people" doesn't refer to selling electricity. It's about democratic control. Tom Lininger, Eugene
TOP-HEAVY OREGON After a long absence I recently returned to Oregon to help expand an old family business. When I first started reading EW I found it entertaining. However, after discovering the dismal state of affairs in Oregon, I began to realize that EW is more than just laughable, it's also a window into some of the minds responsible for Oregon's mess. It appears that over many years, while seeking the perfect safety net, many Oregon I-5 corridor voters micro-managed everything from zoning laws to minimum wage and have created an unbalanced, over-regulated, top-heavy, bureaucratic nanny state. Oregon has far too many public employees with functions that are redundant, intrusive, ineffective or insignificant. Plus, these I-5 dreamers also distrust, or simply hate, the agriculture and timber industries and often times this sentiment includes other businesses. Oregon's failed land-use zoning "experiment" (maybe well-intended) is now illogical, draconian, confiscatory and suffocating. Plus, the current system allows special interest groups (apparently with no filters or repercussions) to impede or prevent almost anything. Overall, this system is an entrepreneurial and business killing machine. It's not a coincidence that Oregon is number one in unemployment. This system is unsustainable. Look around: closed businesses, bankruptcies, high unemployment, shrinking tax base, budget cuts, etc. It's all happening now! One logical solution is a government reduction revolution (perhaps Libertarian), otherwise this current slow painful collapse and implosion will likely continue. Oregon's economy is neither vibrant nor robust, therefore, unfortunately, we must also consider not expanding our business. Grant Roberts, Corvallis
ORTIZ FOR WARD 7 May 18 is a vital day for the people of Eugene. Because of how our primaries work, that day we will make decisions about who will be running our city, who will be making the choices that affect us in a way that the presidential race can't. It's local politics, local elections, that decide which of our neighbors will be representing us on the City Council and in the mayor's office. We know we need a change on the City Council. It has become too conservative. In Ward 7 we're lucky that Andrea Ortiz has stepped up to help make that change happen. We simply cannot let the council continue to be ruled by people without the needs of the people in mind. Andrea has us in her mind and her heart. I hope that at the end of the day, when the ballots have been counted on May 18, the people of Eugene will be lucky enough to have elected Kitty Piercy as our mayor, retained Bonny Bettman and Betty Taylor on the council, and elected Andrea Ortiz as the new Ward 7 councilor. M. Brooke Robertshaw, Eugene
CAMPAIGN FINANCE In 2002 a Campaign Finance Reform initiative was defeated. In 1994 Oregon voters approved a CFR initiative by 728 votes. The Oregon Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional in 1997 claiming it violated "free speech." Oregon is one of the six states that allows unlimited corporate contributions. The defeat of the 2002 Health Care for All initiative is one of many examples of how big spenders with buying influence get their way in Oregon (see www.oregonfollowthemoney.org).Initiative 53 limits all corporate and labor union contributions to candidates for in-state elections. It allows any one or group to create a small donor committee that can receive per person to oppose or support any candidate. A membership or organization such as a labor union can form a SDC. Initiative 53 will bring tough reporting requirements for contribution and expenditures and it enforces provisions. To prevent this law from being overturned by the Oregon Supreme Court or by Oregon Legislature, it will become part of the Oregon Constitution. Women won the right to vote in Oregon by the initiative process before it became federal law in 1912 after numerous defeats. That's what we intend to do with CFR. You can join us by contacting www.voters.net/mindWe're back and here to stay! Ceila (Starshine) Levine, Eugene
NO QUICK FIX We here in Oregon have an opportunity to help level the political playing field with a citizen's initiative. There are four months left to get petition #53 on the ballot in Oregon. This issue is fundamental to all progressive causes! My question is why isn't there huge outpouring of support from environmental and social justice groups, small businesses, and all citizens that want bribery out of Oregon politics? We hear again and again that money donated to politicians corrupts the legislative process. Oregon is one of six states that has no limits on donations to candidates. Enron has its corporate charter here for that very reason. I'm afraid ego and laziness prevents others from helping out on this petition. We progressives have got to start working together and not worrying about "who gets the credit BS." The problems we are facing today need more than a small group of committed citizens to fix. We need help! Pam Driscoll, Cottage Grove
POPULATION CONTROL Kudos to local Realtor Rick Gaston (3/18) for efforts to "encourage a dialogue which acknowledges the reality of (population) growth." Semantics is also important as "land suitable for … housing is becoming extremely scarce," could also be described as resulting from a "long age of people." One of several factors pushing population growth in Eugene is continued national population growth. We continue to pay the price for not heeding the advice of the 1972 Rockefeller Commission which said, in part, (paraphrasing): no benefits would accrue from further growth in the nation's population, and that stabilization would contribute greatly to our ability to solve national problems. This was presented almost 32 years and 90 million people ago, as issues of scale and complexity continue to assault and compound national quality of life. The nation's struggle for adequate housing is just one symptom among many. Foremost in my mind is the tremendous "dilution in democracy" that has unfolded over our time. It would now take 8,700 members of the U.S. House to give back the "value" that existed for each constituent of the founding republic. You can do the math. Each district originally has 3,000 constituents; now they contain more than 600,000 (a 20-fold change in the ratio). Who says numbers of people don't matter? Where is the discussion about a national population policy? Boyd Wilcox, Corvallis
THE OTHER JFK I wanted Wes Clark, you may have wanted Dean or Kucinich. Well, we got Kerry. Hopefully, he'll ask John Edwards for the southern and chick vote. I would gladly marry Ralph Nader, but this man is an obstacle to storming the Bastille. We have got to remove Bush and Cheney. That is job one. John Kerry is an awkward, Lincoln-esque cuss. He is intelligent and war-tested. And a 60-year-old man who can play hockey and snowboard is scary. Read Tour of Duty. Sean Hannity would wet his pants reading Kerry's 'Nam work. Kerry knew what McNamara realized, only 35 years earlier. Vietnam was a blunder. I'm asking you EW readers and voters to forfeit your conscience and devotion to your candidate. Vote Kerry, the other JFK. To you 18 to 34 year olds: You are prime fillet for military service. The reason it ain't 21 to 34 is because so many of my generation were dying in the 'Nam, we forced a constitutional amendment. Old enough to die, old enough to vote. Greg Hume, Creswell
HEADS OR TAILS? It is time for the state of Oregon to choose a symbol for the Federal Mint to put on our own quarter. Gov. Kulongoski has convened a commission to make the final decision. The final four choices are: Mt. Hood, Crater Lake, The Leaping Salmon, The Covered Wagon Heading Down The Trail. I thought I would throw in my opinion. Mt. Hood. Don't like it. Why? Because of the curse of the coin. New Hampshire put The Old Man In The Mountain (a natural cliff that looks like a man's face) on their coin and subsequently the face fell off the mountain. If we put Mt. Hood on our coin we may be tempting fate and get a volcanic eruption. Crater Lake. Don't like it. I think seeing this coin in circulation might just remind us all of our current state budget — a big, deep hole. The Leaping Salmon. I like it. I like the salmon for the children. If we adults screw up and kill all the salmon we can at least show our children a picture of the great salmon on our state coin. "This is what a salmon used to look like, kids. A beautiful fish, good eatin'; now they are all gone. Sorry. My bad." I love The Covered Wagon. The coin design has the Covered Wagon going away from the viewer so what we actually see is the back of a covered wagon heading down the Oregon Trail. Like many Oregonians and most pioneers, I came to Oregon as an adult. I grew up in Ohio and lived in NYC for 10 years. My moving to Oregon was a very conscious adult decision. So, to me, this coin says, "Kiss my ass — I'm moving to Oregon." Chris Pender, Eugene
RIVERFRONT PETITION The R-G is silent but actually a major land-use showdown is under way. The Riverfront greenway pave-over is being championed by David Kelly and others in the name of pursuing his vision of responsible, compact growth. The Riverfront urban renewal referendum petition being circulated may allow citizens more control over the emerging Eugene City Council plan for high impact development to replace the scenic riverfront greenway. In the past, millions of dollars have been directed toward riverfront roads for development to house companies like Electrical Geodesics. This distinguished company's work has even gained the attention of the CIA for their interest in improved methods of lie detection (6/23/99, Portland Business Journal). Last year, UO was reported to be considering a one-of-a-kind nanotechnology research center (the Multiscale Materials and Devices Center) to be sited near the riverfront southbank field (5/6/03 Oregon Daily Emerald). If tax diversions are going to continue to fuel a riverfront pave-over for this type of business, then the public must be well informed and involved in the decision. The referendum petition is now far behind schedule and the last day to turn in signatures will be April 5. You may sign the petition or get your own copies to circulate among neighbors at both locations of Paul's Bike Shop or sign the petition at Sundance Market (24th and Hilyard). I am not a chief petitioner of this referendum and my views do not necessarily reflect those of the businesses or activists involved in circulating this petition. Some of them have not yet seen the danger of the Smart Growth America agenda (this organization receives thousands in donations from Nike, Intel and Les Schwab) and David Kelly's brand of anti-sprawl extremism. Zachary Vishanoff, Eugene
LETTERS POLICY: We print as many letters as space allows. Please limit length to 250 words and submissions to once a month. All letters are subject to editing for length and clarity, and must include address and phone number. E-mail to editor@eugeneweekly.com, fax to 484-4044, or mail to 1251 Lincoln, Eugene 97401.
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|
 |
|||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||
