Letters, Feb. 25
County Bastille proposal
I vote for a jail being funded by marijuana fees. Or, would that be too much irony?
Put the Ashland Canal to bed
Time to tuck this one in.
On Nov. 19, the Ashland City Council voted against the Ashland Canal piping project proposed, and favored, by city staff.
This was after over 18 months of study sessions and public meetings and council business meetings and private meetings and canal walks and contractor input and letters to the paper and letters to the council and studies and quoted stats and hyperbole and exaggerations and accusations from citizens and officials alike.
The cost to the city was over $200,000 for engineering and geological surveys and bio surveys and public relations, not to mention the hours and hours of staff time invested in presenting this project to both the council and the citizens of Ashland. So the staff presented and recommended their plan to council, and a majority of citizens spoke against the plan to the council, and then, the council voted against the plan.
There certainly are new discussions to have about canal repairs for water conservation, and dog waste best practices, but the piping issue has been put to bed. There are so many more new, pressing issues that deserve our attention and energy. We believe that this isn’t the time to try and reanimate this settled issue, but rather, the time to move forward.
Jim Falkenstein, Keep The Canal
Senate SB 1530
Many Oregon county commissioners have commented negatively on SB 1530, a proposal to reduce Oregon’s climate pollution. Not surprisingly, our commissioners have joined the campaign of lies and misinformation fomented by the opposition forces. Apparently, they haven’t bothered to understand the problem or the proposal.
These backward commissioners don’t understand that global warming is contributing to the wildfires and smoke about which they constantly complain. They make bizarre assertions about increasing costs to the county and residents — failing to acknowledge that economic growth, not cost increases, occurred elsewhere when climate programs were established. They also claim that reducing greenhouse gas emissions, the cause for global warming, will not affect global warming.
Oregonians who care about maintaining their agriculture and forestry activities, and care about providing their children and grandchildren with a livable planet and livable country, demand action from the Legislature to reduce emissions statewide. We reject the commissioners’ effort to compromise life for our children!
Evidently our commissioners are unaware that funds generated by SB 1530 will be invested in rural Oregon, so Jackson County stands to benefit financially from the program. No! Our commissioners stick their heads in the sand, reject reality, and seek to compromise our children’s future.