Respectfully Representatives:
Please vote YES on SB-30B Metolius WITHOUT AMENDMENTS
__________________________________________
Protect the Metolius
A Register-Guard Editorial
Published: Saturday, June 9, 2007
Kathy Krause
Portland, OR
Saturday, June 9, 2007
Urging Rep. Whisnant To Support SB 30 - Tom Davis, Sisters
Representative Whisnant:
Thanks for taking the time to respond to my message regarding the Metolius and SB 30B.
Please reconsider your position. To protect the Metolius and it's tributaries destination resorts must be prohibited. I say that as a professional hydrological engineer who worked on these issues for over 30 years. My work addressed groundwater and surface-water hydrology, water quality, nonpoint sources of water pollution and habitat loss, erosion and sedimentation, watershed best management practices and the design of runoff control facilities.
The proposal you refer to in the Senate would not in any way protect the Metolius River Basin. It's proponents are engaging in deception.
Your concerns are:
• I am opposed to the bill as written because I do not support using the Legislature to overturn local decisions.
• I believe there are two issues related to SB30. One is protection of the Metolius River Basin and the second is opposition to a resort. The opposition to the resort can be resolved through the Jefferson County planning process. Then, the protection of the Metolius River Basin can be assured with a reduced protected area, which was discussed in the Senate debate on SB 30. The proposed reduced protected area was described in an amendment, which I could support.
The Legislature has overturned or precluded local decisions on numerous previous occasions, so this is nothing new. Examples follow:
• Current exceptions or preclusions in the destination resort law (ORS 197.455):
• Within 24 air miles of an urban growth boundary with an existing population of 100,000 or more;
On a site with 50 or more contiguous acres of unique or prime farmland;
• Within three miles of a high value crop area;
• On Class 1 or 2 forestlands;
• In the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area as defined by the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Act, P.L. 99-663 (This is essentially the same as SB 30B for the Metolius);
• In an especially sensitive big game habitat area as determined by the State Department of Fish and Wildlife.
• The Oregon Legislature pre-empted local jurisdictions from attempting to control timber harvest methods on private lands (ORS 527.722).
• The Oregon Legislature pre-empted cities from annexing specific properties in White City, Medford and Beaverton.
• The Oregon Legislature removed the authority of local governments to site prisons or energy facilities.
Oregon has the authority over land use in the State and has wisely delegated much of the implementation of State land use authority to local jurisdictions but also wisely keeps control for statewide issues.
Oregon controls water quality, air quality, the public’s fish and wildlife resources, and the rights to use the public’s water. It makes no sense for Oregon to attempt to protect the public’s fisheries in a world-class area like the Metolius without also protecting against watershed disturbances that seriously threaten those fisheries. Severe losses in the Metolius and Whychus will occur as a result of the destination resort disturbances if SB 30B isn’t approved, as they have occurred at hundreds of other locations throughout the world. Some can be mitigated somewhat, but very serious damage would still result.
The “reduced protected area” referred to ignores the groundwater quality threats to the superb Metolius; it’s tributaries and the neighboring Whychus Creek. All would still be very vulnerable to water quality and habitat degradation from surface water runoff and ground water. It ignores the fact that groundwater doesn’t follow surface divides and keeps moving until it reaches a discharge zone like First, Lake, Fly or Whychus Creeks.
Whychus is the focus of $80 to 100 million of investments to restore steelhead and adequate flow. It’s a magnificent giant recovering from decades of abuse and a destination resort would be more abuse of a very serious kind.
Tom Davis, PE
Sisters OR
Thanks for taking the time to respond to my message regarding the Metolius and SB 30B.
Please reconsider your position. To protect the Metolius and it's tributaries destination resorts must be prohibited. I say that as a professional hydrological engineer who worked on these issues for over 30 years. My work addressed groundwater and surface-water hydrology, water quality, nonpoint sources of water pollution and habitat loss, erosion and sedimentation, watershed best management practices and the design of runoff control facilities.
The proposal you refer to in the Senate would not in any way protect the Metolius River Basin. It's proponents are engaging in deception.
Your concerns are:
• I am opposed to the bill as written because I do not support using the Legislature to overturn local decisions.
• I believe there are two issues related to SB30. One is protection of the Metolius River Basin and the second is opposition to a resort. The opposition to the resort can be resolved through the Jefferson County planning process. Then, the protection of the Metolius River Basin can be assured with a reduced protected area, which was discussed in the Senate debate on SB 30. The proposed reduced protected area was described in an amendment, which I could support.
The Legislature has overturned or precluded local decisions on numerous previous occasions, so this is nothing new. Examples follow:
• Current exceptions or preclusions in the destination resort law (ORS 197.455):
• Within 24 air miles of an urban growth boundary with an existing population of 100,000 or more;
On a site with 50 or more contiguous acres of unique or prime farmland;
• Within three miles of a high value crop area;
• On Class 1 or 2 forestlands;
• In the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area as defined by the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Act, P.L. 99-663 (This is essentially the same as SB 30B for the Metolius);
• In an especially sensitive big game habitat area as determined by the State Department of Fish and Wildlife.
• The Oregon Legislature pre-empted local jurisdictions from attempting to control timber harvest methods on private lands (ORS 527.722).
• The Oregon Legislature pre-empted cities from annexing specific properties in White City, Medford and Beaverton.
• The Oregon Legislature removed the authority of local governments to site prisons or energy facilities.
Oregon has the authority over land use in the State and has wisely delegated much of the implementation of State land use authority to local jurisdictions but also wisely keeps control for statewide issues.
Oregon controls water quality, air quality, the public’s fish and wildlife resources, and the rights to use the public’s water. It makes no sense for Oregon to attempt to protect the public’s fisheries in a world-class area like the Metolius without also protecting against watershed disturbances that seriously threaten those fisheries. Severe losses in the Metolius and Whychus will occur as a result of the destination resort disturbances if SB 30B isn’t approved, as they have occurred at hundreds of other locations throughout the world. Some can be mitigated somewhat, but very serious damage would still result.
The “reduced protected area” referred to ignores the groundwater quality threats to the superb Metolius; it’s tributaries and the neighboring Whychus Creek. All would still be very vulnerable to water quality and habitat degradation from surface water runoff and ground water. It ignores the fact that groundwater doesn’t follow surface divides and keeps moving until it reaches a discharge zone like First, Lake, Fly or Whychus Creeks.
Whychus is the focus of $80 to 100 million of investments to restore steelhead and adequate flow. It’s a magnificent giant recovering from decades of abuse and a destination resort would be more abuse of a very serious kind.
Tom Davis, PE
Sisters OR
Friday, June 8, 2007
Pay Attention to Oregonians, Not Special Interests - Kathy Krause, Portland
Respectfully Representatives:
I have just received a copy of a flyer the Ponderosa Land & Cattle Company is passing out at the State Capital to try and suggest a "compromise" for Senate Bill 30 - Metolius. I am just a private citizen who cares deeply about the State I live in. I do, however, work in the advertising world and I know a good marketing campaign when I see one! The brightly colored and soothing font, the cheerful positive message, the illusion this will be a positive improvement for everyone. The "look what we are giving up" message is all just a just a brilliant, well thought out design to sell you a cheap bag of goods! Please, don't fall for it! Just like the late night television infomercials, someone has been paid a great deal of money to mislead, or convince the consumer, or in this case, the "voter" into believing he or she needs this "answer to everything" solution. Again, don't fall for it!
The Colson land has value in its original purchased condition - as a timber harvesting agreement. Senate Bill 30 is about protecting a treasured river, a landmark for the State of Oregon! We should be proud to have it! If the Colson Cattle Company had purchased land which was meant for resort development, this issue may deserve different attention - but they didn't. This is a rezone, and a poorly made decision (in my opinion) by a county which probably had good intentions, but didn't have the manpower, forethought or funds to investigate the long term ramifications of their decision.
The voting, tax paying Oregonians would like their voices heard and expressed by our elected officials. We do not have the money to hire marketing experts to hand out flyers at the State Capital. We do not stand to make millions of dollars off of resort development real estate sales.
What we do have, is faith that our voices will be heard and expressed through you, our elected Representatives! If our voices are heard, we stand to gain a protected piece of Oregon that we, hard working, tax paying Oregonians can escape to. A place to walk the banks of an unspoiled, unpolluted federally wild and scenic river. A place to recover from illness with the peace and solitude of nature. A place to show our children what nature is on its own. A place to replenish our souls from the madness of trying to "make it". A place that we can afford, because the only price of admission is the promise to keep it as it is.
What do you stand to gain by listening to the voters which helped put you into office? The promise we will forever cherish, remember and honor you for making the right decision by not amending a bill which will protect a piece of our valued State. The promise that when there is an important piece of legislation that is close to your heart, we will listen, support you and be your voice. Please DO NOT amend or support any amendments to Senate Bill 30!
Thank you,
Kathy Krause
Portland Oregon
I have just received a copy of a flyer the Ponderosa Land & Cattle Company is passing out at the State Capital to try and suggest a "compromise" for Senate Bill 30 - Metolius. I am just a private citizen who cares deeply about the State I live in. I do, however, work in the advertising world and I know a good marketing campaign when I see one! The brightly colored and soothing font, the cheerful positive message, the illusion this will be a positive improvement for everyone. The "look what we are giving up" message is all just a just a brilliant, well thought out design to sell you a cheap bag of goods! Please, don't fall for it! Just like the late night television infomercials, someone has been paid a great deal of money to mislead, or convince the consumer, or in this case, the "voter" into believing he or she needs this "answer to everything" solution. Again, don't fall for it!
The Colson land has value in its original purchased condition - as a timber harvesting agreement. Senate Bill 30 is about protecting a treasured river, a landmark for the State of Oregon! We should be proud to have it! If the Colson Cattle Company had purchased land which was meant for resort development, this issue may deserve different attention - but they didn't. This is a rezone, and a poorly made decision (in my opinion) by a county which probably had good intentions, but didn't have the manpower, forethought or funds to investigate the long term ramifications of their decision.
The voting, tax paying Oregonians would like their voices heard and expressed by our elected officials. We do not have the money to hire marketing experts to hand out flyers at the State Capital. We do not stand to make millions of dollars off of resort development real estate sales.
What we do have, is faith that our voices will be heard and expressed through you, our elected Representatives! If our voices are heard, we stand to gain a protected piece of Oregon that we, hard working, tax paying Oregonians can escape to. A place to walk the banks of an unspoiled, unpolluted federally wild and scenic river. A place to recover from illness with the peace and solitude of nature. A place to show our children what nature is on its own. A place to replenish our souls from the madness of trying to "make it". A place that we can afford, because the only price of admission is the promise to keep it as it is.
What do you stand to gain by listening to the voters which helped put you into office? The promise we will forever cherish, remember and honor you for making the right decision by not amending a bill which will protect a piece of our valued State. The promise that when there is an important piece of legislation that is close to your heart, we will listen, support you and be your voice. Please DO NOT amend or support any amendments to Senate Bill 30!
Thank you,
Kathy Krause
Portland Oregon
Thursday, June 7, 2007
To Rep. Whisnant: Get Involved - Rebecca Hardesty, Boise, ID
Dear Representative Whisnant,
The reason an appeal is being made to the legislature is because the only purpose for the proposed rezone of this pristine area is to promote private developer interests and limited county economic interests at the inordinate expense of all Oregonians and nature itself. This shocking subsidy requires legislative intervention. Frankly, your constituents didn't elect you to sit back and not get involved in local issues when local decisions reflect promotion of private party interests at shocking public expense. The local agencies who are overseeing this decision are subordinate to the commissioners who made the decision in the first place so there is little reason for confidence in the objectivity of agency or appellate review.
I ask you one question - what is the benefit of this proposed rezone to Oregonians? Now consider the cost - the irreversible loss of the natural, pristine and untarnished Metolius River Basin, a cost which is completely unacceptable to your constituents. Your constituents want you to explain why you would support a local measure which is so clearly out of balance with the public good. Your constituents want you to explain why you, the person they elected to balance such questionable displays of power at a local level, won't stand up and do what they elected you to do.
Nature has value. It has much more value to your constituents than private profit for a couple of developers. We expect you to stand up and defend our values and protect our beautiful Metolius River Basin from being destroyed forever.
Please consider taking a hard stand on this issue and suporting SB30 as your constituents desire.
Rebecca B.W. Hardesty
Boise, ID
[Sent In Reponse To:]
Thank you for your message. I appreciate that you took the time to contact me.
The Metolius Basin is a beautiful area, and I do understand your concerns. Senate Bill 30 is currently in the House Elections, Ethics and Rules Committee awaiting a hearing. I am opposed to the bill as written because I do not support using the Legislature to overturn local decisions. Also, the decision by the County Commission to allow the two proposed developments has been appealed to the Land Use Board of Appeal. I believe we should give the courts time to sort out the issue.
I would support a compromise to ensure the protection of this pristine area but I cannot support the bill as written.
Gene Whisnant
State Representative
District 53
503.986.1453
The reason an appeal is being made to the legislature is because the only purpose for the proposed rezone of this pristine area is to promote private developer interests and limited county economic interests at the inordinate expense of all Oregonians and nature itself. This shocking subsidy requires legislative intervention. Frankly, your constituents didn't elect you to sit back and not get involved in local issues when local decisions reflect promotion of private party interests at shocking public expense. The local agencies who are overseeing this decision are subordinate to the commissioners who made the decision in the first place so there is little reason for confidence in the objectivity of agency or appellate review.
I ask you one question - what is the benefit of this proposed rezone to Oregonians? Now consider the cost - the irreversible loss of the natural, pristine and untarnished Metolius River Basin, a cost which is completely unacceptable to your constituents. Your constituents want you to explain why you would support a local measure which is so clearly out of balance with the public good. Your constituents want you to explain why you, the person they elected to balance such questionable displays of power at a local level, won't stand up and do what they elected you to do.
Nature has value. It has much more value to your constituents than private profit for a couple of developers. We expect you to stand up and defend our values and protect our beautiful Metolius River Basin from being destroyed forever.
Please consider taking a hard stand on this issue and suporting SB30 as your constituents desire.
Rebecca B.W. Hardesty
Boise, ID
[Sent In Reponse To:]
Thank you for your message. I appreciate that you took the time to contact me.
The Metolius Basin is a beautiful area, and I do understand your concerns. Senate Bill 30 is currently in the House Elections, Ethics and Rules Committee awaiting a hearing. I am opposed to the bill as written because I do not support using the Legislature to overturn local decisions. Also, the decision by the County Commission to allow the two proposed developments has been appealed to the Land Use Board of Appeal. I believe we should give the courts time to sort out the issue.
I would support a compromise to ensure the protection of this pristine area but I cannot support the bill as written.
Gene Whisnant
State Representative
District 53
503.986.1453
It's About The Water - John R. Anderson, Bend
Dear Representative Burley:
[copied to all Representatives]
I write today to request that you cast a yes vote in support of SB30. As a fly fisher and professional entomologist I am very much concerned that construction of large destination resorts near the Metolius River, and the associated ground water pumping, will result in lower flow rates in this pristine river and its associated creeks/streams. The large number of residences planned also will likely add unwanted pollutants to the ground water. Such pollutants eventually could negatively impact the river and its associated creeks/streams.
John R. Anderson
Bend, OR
[copied to all Representatives]
I write today to request that you cast a yes vote in support of SB30. As a fly fisher and professional entomologist I am very much concerned that construction of large destination resorts near the Metolius River, and the associated ground water pumping, will result in lower flow rates in this pristine river and its associated creeks/streams. The large number of residences planned also will likely add unwanted pollutants to the ground water. Such pollutants eventually could negatively impact the river and its associated creeks/streams.
John R. Anderson
Bend, OR
Don't Allow Metolius To Become A Commodity - Karyn Black, Bend
[Sen to all Representatives:]
I am writing to express my support of SB 30 and to ask that you support this bill as well. As an Oregonian for the last 8 years (and I plan on many more), I appreciate the diverse and beautiful landscapes that are found in Oregon. The Metolius River and surrounding forest is one of my favorite areas to visit, as it is not far from my home in Bend and offers wonderful hiking opportunities along the river. Coming from a state where natural resources were viewed as a commodity to be developed and profited from and the resulting harm that came from those activities, I can tell you that the natural resources of Oregon are very precious - and outstanding examples, such as the Metolius should be protected from further development forever.
Take a moment and consider what draws people to Oregon - it is the natural beauty of the state - and the fact that there are undeveloped areas where people can get away from the hustle and bustle of their daily lives. They are drawn to Oregon because it is unique in its diversity of landscapes, abundant in recreational opportunities and because of the forethought of our early leaders, much of it has remained undeveloped.
As special as Oregon is, naturally people want to move here and live or stay in the places that speak to their souls; But that does NOT mean that we should allow the outstanding areas of Oregon to be developed into resorts and housing! With each area such as the Metolius that we allow to be developed, Oregon loses a little bit of its uniqueness and becomes a little be more like the places that people are trying to get away from.
Oregon's early leaders had the forethought to protect some of Oregon's special places and I hope that our current leaders will have the same forethought to protect even more of the state from needless development. Keep Oregon special - a place that is different - a place where outstanding natural areas remain open to everyone who is willing to get out of their car and walk around a bit and not just the folks who can buy a view of the mountains and membership to a private golf course. Support SB 30!
Sincerely,
Karyn Black
Bend, OR
I am writing to express my support of SB 30 and to ask that you support this bill as well. As an Oregonian for the last 8 years (and I plan on many more), I appreciate the diverse and beautiful landscapes that are found in Oregon. The Metolius River and surrounding forest is one of my favorite areas to visit, as it is not far from my home in Bend and offers wonderful hiking opportunities along the river. Coming from a state where natural resources were viewed as a commodity to be developed and profited from and the resulting harm that came from those activities, I can tell you that the natural resources of Oregon are very precious - and outstanding examples, such as the Metolius should be protected from further development forever.
Take a moment and consider what draws people to Oregon - it is the natural beauty of the state - and the fact that there are undeveloped areas where people can get away from the hustle and bustle of their daily lives. They are drawn to Oregon because it is unique in its diversity of landscapes, abundant in recreational opportunities and because of the forethought of our early leaders, much of it has remained undeveloped.
As special as Oregon is, naturally people want to move here and live or stay in the places that speak to their souls; But that does NOT mean that we should allow the outstanding areas of Oregon to be developed into resorts and housing! With each area such as the Metolius that we allow to be developed, Oregon loses a little bit of its uniqueness and becomes a little be more like the places that people are trying to get away from.
Oregon's early leaders had the forethought to protect some of Oregon's special places and I hope that our current leaders will have the same forethought to protect even more of the state from needless development. Keep Oregon special - a place that is different - a place where outstanding natural areas remain open to everyone who is willing to get out of their car and walk around a bit and not just the folks who can buy a view of the mountains and membership to a private golf course. Support SB 30!
Sincerely,
Karyn Black
Bend, OR
Wednesday, June 6, 2007
"Why resorts, Metolius River don't mix"
This piece originally appeared in the June 6th Bulletin on Page C6. It can be found online (subscription only) at the Bulletin's website here.
Why resorts, Metolius River don’t mix
By Erik Kancler / Bulletin guest columnist
Published: June 06. 2007 5:00AM PST
It’s not often that a place as extraordinary as the Metolius River is so unnervingly threatened by plans for massive residential developments. In Oregon, of all places, these sorts of things aren’t supposed to happen.
Yet, every so often they do. And when local protection either isn’t feasible — or local governments fail to grasp the big picture — higher powers must step in. Otherwise, amazing places like the Metolius River, Oregon’s beaches, Hells Canyon, Crater Lake or the Columbia River Gorge would be severely and irreparably degraded.
In the case of Jefferson County and the Metolius River, the issue is both bigger and smaller than county officials care to acknowledge. Smaller, in that for years, county officials in Madras have ignored the voices of Camp Sherman, a small community nestled along the banks of the Metolius and geographically isolated from the rest of the county. Bigger, in that the Metolius is a home of sorts for thousands of families, anglers, hunters and others not just from Central Oregon, but from all over the state and the nation who visit the Metolius regularly and have been coming for generations.
These people, a great many of whom have been voicing staunch support for Senate Bill 30 and who oppose destination resort development in or near the Metolius, cut cleanly across the social and political divisions that usually define “environmentally oriented” issues. The debate over the Metolius isn’t Republican vs. Democrat or wealthy vs. middle class — those types of distinctions simply aren’t relevant here.
Sen. Ben Westlund — SB 30’s primary sponsor and most vocal advocate — has received, he says, more letters supporting this bill than he has on any other issue since taking office. And for every hundred letters of support, on average, only one is sent in opposition.
Central Oregon LandWatch has received more than 200 letters from concerned citizens to their lawmakers. We’ve banked them online along with images, personal stories and historical accounts at www.noresorts.blogspot.com.
What these citizens want, without fail, is a complete ban on destination resorts in or within three miles of the Metolius River Basin. SB 30 in its current form doesn’t go quite that far but does call for a total prohibition where it matters most.
What they all recognize is that resorts in or near the Metolius will have dramatic impacts on wildlife — terrestrial and aquatic; cost government millions in fire prevention; create tremendous traffic impacts in the basin and in Sisters; work directly against millions of dollars being invested in stream restoration and fish reintroduction in the Metolius (and Whychus Creek); and irreversibly alter this remote, unique and completely sustainable combination of low-level human activity and ecological splendor.
So why then is SB 30 controversial?
The biggest problem, it seems, is the belief by some that the state is unduly stepping on the toes of a local government that has followed the rules. The state, however, clearly possesses the power to protect places of broad importance against local threats when the local government isn’t willing to do so. True, these powers should be used only when absolutely necessary, but they are undeniably real.
The last time the Legislature prohibited destination resorts from a particular geographical area was 20 years ago when they were banned from the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area. That decision was, and still is, lauded as landmark protection. So it can neither be argued that the state has no business using these powers nor that it has historically been heavy-handed on such matters. Twenty years is a long time.
Given the unwillingness of Jefferson County officials to look beyond their own economic interests, the massive threats posed by resorts, the unique beauty and ecology of the Metolius River, and the statewide importance of preserving places like this, surely the Metolius, like the Gorge, meets all the fundamental criteria for state-level protection. Eleven out of our 30 state senators voted against SB 30 on May 22. What they were essentially saying was that were SB 30 not about the Metolius, but rather about protecting Crater Lake, Hells Canyon, the Gorge or Oregon’s beaches, they would leave them open to development. They would let the locals rule, regardless of their aim. That’s not leadership — that’s an inexcusable lack of it.
As Sen. Westlund has been fond of saying: Let’s keep Oregon Oregon. Without unspoiled places like the Metolius River, Oregon wouldn’t be Oregon. At least not the Oregon we know and love. SB 30 is fair and just, it is badly needed, and it deserves our full support.
Erik Kancler, erik@centraloregon landwatch.org, is the executive director of Central Oregon LandWatch.
"The Big Smear"
Many of you have been reading, probably with a great deal of disgust, the Bulletin's harsh treatment of the proponents of Senate Bill 30, most signficantly, of Senator Betsy Johnson, over the past several months.
The Source Weekly's H. Bruce Miller, in his piece The Big Smear lays this "red herring" bare for all to see. The piece was published in this week's edition of the Source Weekly and is posted in its entirety here with the author's permission.
The Big Smear: The Bulletin’s campaign of deceit against the Metolius bill
red herring (n.) – something that distracts attention from the real issue (from the practice of drawing a red herring across a trail to confuse hunting dogs)
When it comes to red herrings, you won’t find any that stink worse than the one The Bulletin is using to delude people about Senate Bill 30.
Senate Bill 30, whose principal sponsor is state Sen. Ben Westlund (D-Tumalo), aims to protect the Metolius River and its environs by barring destination resort developments close to it. Immediately affected would be two proposed resorts, a 3,500-acre monster planned by Ponderosa Land & Cattle Co. LLC and one of more than 600 acres proposed by Sisters resident Shane Lundgren’s Dutch Pacific Resources LLC. The bill has passed the Senate and is headed for a crucial committee vote in the House.
The Bulletin, which historically has supported the sacred right of developers to build whatever they want wherever they want (except at Broken Top, but that’s another story) has pulled out all the stops in a desperate effort to derail SB 30. I’ve been in the journalism business for 40 years, and I have never seen a supposedly reputable newspaper engage in such a sleazy campaign of deceit, distortion, misrepresentation and character assassination.
The main personal target of the campaign is Sen. Betsy Johnson (D-Scappoose), whose family has owned about 160 acres near the headwaters of the Metolius since the early 1900s. Johnson, according to Bulletin editorials, has a conflict of interest because SB 30 – which she supports, although she’s not a sponsor – supposedly would increase the value of her land by preventing development nearby. (It also would prevent her from developing her own land, but never mind that detail.)
The red herring – the phony non-issue designed to deflect attention from the real issue – is the claim, which The Bulletin keeps peddling in editorial after editorial, that SB 30 is “special interest” legislation designed to benefit Johnson and a handful of others who own property near the river. As the paper sneered on May 15, SB 30 “suits Sen. Betsy Johnson and the scores of people who'd like to turn the Camp Sherman area into a gated community. Their gated community.”
There is, of course, no fence around Camp Sherman or the Metolius. Thousands of people go there every year from all parts of Oregon and the world to fish, hike, bike, camp, or just enjoy the scenery of one of the most beautiful places on the planet.
And those people are backing SB 30.
Westlund’s office reports it has received more than 600 letters supporting the bill and only seven opposing it. Johnson’s office said Friday that it’s gotten “easily” more than 100 messages in support and only two in opposition – “and one of those was from a Lundgren.”
According to Central Oregon LandWatch, at least a dozen groups have expressed support for SB 30, including Friends of the Metolius, WaterWatch, the Oregon State Public Interest Research Group (OSPIRG), the Oregon League of Conservation Voters (OLCV), Oregon Backcountry Hunters and Anglers, the Native Fish Society, Trout Unlimited, the Trust For Public Land, Central Oregon Flyfishers, 1000 Friends of Oregon, the Sisters City Council and the Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs.
LandWatch’s blog, noresorts.blogspot.com, has posted more than 250 messages supporting SB 30. They have come from Bend, Redmond, Portland, Enterprise, McMinnville, Beaverton, Lake Oswego, Eugene, Salem, Philomath, Tillamook, Seattle, Boise, Palo Alto, CA, Fort Collins, CO, Brooklyn, NY – you name it.
“Special interest” legislation backed by a few Camp Sherman property owners? Hardly.
Curiously, while it continues to slime Betsy Johnson and other SB 30 supporters for their alleged “conflicts of interest,” The Bulletin seems rather nonchalant about conflicts on the part of those who attack the bill on its opinion page. On May 29 it published an “In My View” piece by former watermaster Duane Clark under the headline: “Development miles away will not harm the Metolius.” Coincidentally – or so he says – Clark is a good friend of the Colson family, principals of Ponderosa Land & Cattle Co. LLC, and has done paid consulting work for them in the past. And he’s also a Central Oregon real estate broker. (For all the juicy details see The Wandering Eye.)
Last Friday The Bulletin debased itself to a new level, committing one of the cardinal sins of journalism – spinning the news to push its editorial agenda. A story on the front page of its Local section headlined “Sen. Johnson finds herself in a swirl over Metolius bill” was a classic example of what’s known in newspaper parlance as “a hatchet job.”
The opening paragraphs described at length and in colorful detail how Johnson gave Sen. Vicki Walker, chair of the Senate Education and General Government Committee, a flight over the Metolius in Johnson’s private plane. The obvious intent was to give the impression there was something unethical, maybe even illegal, about the flight.
But if you had the persistence to read down to the 18th (!!) paragraph you would have found this: “The plane trip didn’t run afoul of any rules because legislators can provide transportation to each other for official business, according to the Government Standards and Practices Commission.”
The real “swirl” you hear is the sound of The Bulletin’s credibility and reputation as an ethical newspaper going down the toilet.
I’ve pondered long and hard about The Bulletin’s possible motives for its brazenly deceitful campaign against SB 30. As I mentioned earlier, the paper is rabidly pro-growth and always has been. But that doesn’t seem like enough to explain the calculated viciousness – not to mention the hysterical tone – of The Bulletin’s attacks. The paper has weighed in on other development issues without resorting to such vile tactics. Which leads me to wonder whether there might be some more powerful motivation, either personal or financial, at work.
The Bulletin likes to paint itself as a champion of openness and full disclosure, so maybe its editorial board will join me in calling for Ponderosa Land & Cattle Co. LLC and Dutch Pacific Resources LLC to disclose the names of all their investors and lay any nasty suspicions to rest.
But I won’t be holding my breath.
From A Swing Voter: Support SB 30 - Brian Grubb, Portland
Representatives,
I am writing to stress the importance of your vote on Senate Bill 30-Metolius. As you may know, this bill will prohibit siting a destination resort in or within three miles of the Metolius River Basin. I urge you to vote yes on this bill and the reason is simple: the Metolius River Basin is just too special a place to mess with any further. The consequences of the proposed development in the area would be devastating and irreversible.
When Jefferson county officials voted to rezone the area to permit the proposed development, I believe they were trying to act for the good of the county, economically. They saw dollar signs and the revenue that 3500 new homes would bring to county coffers. Unfortunately, I do not believe they gave the rezoning issue the due diligence or conducted the research required for a proposal of such enormous magnitude.
Fortunately, for the rest of Oregon and the World, this is not just about Jefferson County. What we‚re talking about here is an Oregon treasure, a jewel- unique in its place on tiny planet Earth. What we‚re talking about here is a National treasure- a World treasure- a place people come to from all over the globe to visit its pristine serenity. Oregonians should consider themselves blessed to have such a place to call their own. When I travel, I tell people, "We have this place in Oregon, the Metolius River, it's unbelievable". I pray I never have to say, "We had this pristine place once, the Metolius River, but it was forever changed by a irrational land use decision". Please help keep the distinctness of the Metolius in the present tense.
If you have never been to the Metolius River Basin, you must go. You will experience something special- too special to alter. Every summer, our family vacations at a Central Oregon destination resort, one of many in the area. We always make a point of visiting the Metolius, an entire river that drips out of the side of a hill in what must be the most incredible Ponderosa Pine forest on Earth. Crystal clear water and World-class fly-fishing attract anglers from countries around the globe. Our small children delight in its mystique and explore with great curiosity its natural wonders. I hope that their children and grandchildren can experience the area in the way that they have been privileged enough to. I hope that your children and grandchildren can do the same.
As an elected representative of our state, I believe it is your duty to act on behalf of the will of the people of Oregon. This is not a partisan issue, as a "yes" vote benefits everyone- Republican or Democrat. Please do not politicize this, as your Republican colleagues in the Senate did (not a single Republican Senator voted in support of SB30 despite overwhelming public support and minimal public opposition for the bill). This is not a Jefferson county issue. If it were, you would not be asked to vote on this bill on behalf of your constituents. This is an Oregon issue. Our Oregon.
Thank you for your consideration and I'm putting my faith in you to make the
right choice.
Sincerely,
Brian Grubb
Native Oregonian
Concerned Citizen
Constituent
Registered Independent Swing Voter
Portland, OR
I am writing to stress the importance of your vote on Senate Bill 30-Metolius. As you may know, this bill will prohibit siting a destination resort in or within three miles of the Metolius River Basin. I urge you to vote yes on this bill and the reason is simple: the Metolius River Basin is just too special a place to mess with any further. The consequences of the proposed development in the area would be devastating and irreversible.
When Jefferson county officials voted to rezone the area to permit the proposed development, I believe they were trying to act for the good of the county, economically. They saw dollar signs and the revenue that 3500 new homes would bring to county coffers. Unfortunately, I do not believe they gave the rezoning issue the due diligence or conducted the research required for a proposal of such enormous magnitude.
Fortunately, for the rest of Oregon and the World, this is not just about Jefferson County. What we‚re talking about here is an Oregon treasure, a jewel- unique in its place on tiny planet Earth. What we‚re talking about here is a National treasure- a World treasure- a place people come to from all over the globe to visit its pristine serenity. Oregonians should consider themselves blessed to have such a place to call their own. When I travel, I tell people, "We have this place in Oregon, the Metolius River, it's unbelievable". I pray I never have to say, "We had this pristine place once, the Metolius River, but it was forever changed by a irrational land use decision". Please help keep the distinctness of the Metolius in the present tense.
If you have never been to the Metolius River Basin, you must go. You will experience something special- too special to alter. Every summer, our family vacations at a Central Oregon destination resort, one of many in the area. We always make a point of visiting the Metolius, an entire river that drips out of the side of a hill in what must be the most incredible Ponderosa Pine forest on Earth. Crystal clear water and World-class fly-fishing attract anglers from countries around the globe. Our small children delight in its mystique and explore with great curiosity its natural wonders. I hope that their children and grandchildren can experience the area in the way that they have been privileged enough to. I hope that your children and grandchildren can do the same.
As an elected representative of our state, I believe it is your duty to act on behalf of the will of the people of Oregon. This is not a partisan issue, as a "yes" vote benefits everyone- Republican or Democrat. Please do not politicize this, as your Republican colleagues in the Senate did (not a single Republican Senator voted in support of SB30 despite overwhelming public support and minimal public opposition for the bill). This is not a Jefferson county issue. If it were, you would not be asked to vote on this bill on behalf of your constituents. This is an Oregon issue. Our Oregon.
Thank you for your consideration and I'm putting my faith in you to make the
right choice.
Sincerely,
Brian Grubb
Native Oregonian
Concerned Citizen
Constituent
Registered Independent Swing Voter
Portland, OR
