Letters to the Editor, Nov. 21
Shame on them
If I read the front page of Wednesday’s paper correctly, both the governor and the legislators were already spending the proceeds of Measure 97 in their budget before the proposition passed (which it didn’t). And now they are trying to cover their "whatevers" by raising taxes. Shame on them.
Why not front page?
Regarding the Dakota Access Pipeline, Energy Transfer Partner's website writes assurance that pipelines are safe and do not leak. It was tough to research and find real numbers, but I counted 34 pipeline leaks from 2015 data, the largest leak being 3 million gallons of brine in North Dakota (www.nrdc.org/onearth/spill-tracker).
Energy Transfer Partner was ordered by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to halt, at least temporarily, but there are reports that ETP may continue building DAPL without a permit and pay a fine. If this happens, I hope to see criminal action, reparations to native peoples, and destruction of DAPL. Why are we not seeing front-page reports in the Medford Mail Tribune on the Dakota Access Pipeline?
Siskiyou County support
I write to affirm that indeed there are is a substantial number of citizens in Siskiyou County who support the expansion of the Cascade-Siskiyou Monument as I do. At the official public hearing for Sen. Jeff Merkley last month, hundreds of supporters were from both Oregon and neighboring California communities.
I would respectfully request that the Siskiyou County Board of Supervisors carefully consider the long-term value of this proposed expansion in terms of environmental health as well as the economic benefits of ecotourism that will be forthcoming. Also, I hope that the supervisors set the record straight on a few issues: the monument designation would be for about 5,000 acres of public land in Siskiyou County, does not affect private property, and does allow for hunting and other forms of recreation.
Furthermore, resource extraction usually produces only short-term economic gains, whereas tourism can bring money to an area forever. This is an opportunity to enhance an already stunning place that will be revered and enjoyed by many people in many ways. I urge all of the citizens of Siskiyou County to stand behind this wise proposal, a measure that Teddy Roosevelt and John Muir would affirm.
John K. Bermel
Preserve a historic charter
Development and the demand for it comes in many forms, and the push to amend the historic charter of Jacksonville is a good example of the extent to which money and rhetoric can further a cause. Fortunately, the public believe the charter has served to protect the historic integrity of the town and needs no alterations.
Oregon Revised Statute 197.296, in addition, requires cities to increase their density. Jacksonville, in 2008, arbitrarily interpreted this statue to mean that it must double the amount of livable square footage on every city lot, eventually resulting in the building of new structures that now obstruct and overwhelm views to historic buildings.
Existing building codes are gradually "burying" open views as you approach the town, with new, massive, two-story, 35-foot-tall construction.
No wording in the state statue defines or dictates the amount of increased square footage each town must develop, yet why has Jacksonville allowed this excessive increase? Increased revenue?
Building codes as they now stand will permanently alter the landscape of Jacksonville if the residents and people all over the state do not intervene and demand building limitations. Is it not worth saving a National Historic Landmark?
Steven A. Gardner