HinesSight

City of Salem fails to provide good reason for Third Bridge

I asked a great question at today's DemoForum session on whether a Third Bridge is needed in Salem, Oregon. 

"Mr. Fernandez, what is the single most important reason Salem needs a Third Bridge? And please support your reason with some facts."

The answer City of Salem Public Works director Peter Fernandez gave was direct, concise, and straightforward. 

Also... proof that a Third Bridge isn't needed, just as No Third Bridge spokesperson Scott Bassett argued at the forum.

Consider this: Fernandez is a smart guy.

Also, he's an experienced engineer. He has been intimately involved with Third Bridge planning for years. He's speaking at a forum filled with people skeptical about the project. The Mayor and several city councillors are in attendance.

Public Works Director Peter Fernandez is going to come up with the very best answer he can to my question.

I asked for the single most important reason. Numero Uno. #1. The words most likely to make opponents of a Third Bridge think, "whoa, maybe we really do need this thing!"

So how did Fernandez respond?

By saying that the single most important reason is that there is only one way into and out of West Salem. Redundancy and safety were the top reasons a Third Bridge is needed. He said that the bridges are seismically unfit. Currently serious accidents on the bridge tie up traffic for long distances into neighborhoods on both sides of the river.

Sort of true.

But these are lousy reasons to spend $600 million or so on a Third Bridge. Scott Bassett explained why when he took the microphone in response to Fernandez' answer to my question.

Obviously Salem already has two bridges, or we wouldn't be talking about a Third Bridge. Fernandez' reference to one bridge probably meant that the current bridges each are four lanes going one way, westbound or eastbound. But Bassett pointed out that plans already exist for some lanes to be reversed on a bridge if an accident shuts down the other bridge.

Further, the Union Street walking/biking "pedestrian" bridge is capable of handling emergency vehicles. And there is another bridge across the Willamette in Independence, about twenty minutes away. So a $600 million Third Bridge wouldn't offer much additional redundancy.

[Update: here's a Vimeo video of the DemoForum session. My question is asked and answered at about the 55:00 minute mark.]

A new bridge would, however, be much more likely to survive the 9.0 Big One earthquake which will hit western Oregon eventually. It isn't a question of "if," but of "when." The geological historical record proves that.

Bassett addressed this issue in his remarks. The current bridges need to be retrofitted. He said they were designed to remain standing after a powerful earthquake, but not to remain usable. (Of course, many roads likely won't be usable after the Big One either.)

The situation is akin to what my wife and I faced. We live in a house that was built in the early '70s, before building codes required stricter earthquake standards. Instead of buying a newer house, we spent way less to retrofit our home and garage.

Peter Fernandez' answer to my question points to the wisdom of doing the same thing with the current bridges: retrofit them; this can be done for tens of millions rather than hundreds of millions of dollars. 

Bassett discussed improvements to the road connections that could be made at the ends of the current bridges. These would take care of congestion problems -- even though tellingly, Fernandez did not mention traffic congestion in his Most Important Reason response.

Bottom line: today the City of Salem Public Works director admitted that the most important reason to build a Third Bridge isn't a very good reason. Redundancy and safety concerns with the current bridges can be resolved without constructing another bridge across the Willamette.

Watch this instructive No Third Bridge video to learn more about why Salem doesn't need a new bridge.

  

Putting parking meters in downtown Salem is a dumb idea

There are things I wish downtown Salem (Oregon) had more of: night life, throngs of people, cool shops and art galleries, vegetarian-friendly restaurants, street musicians.

Parking meters... that's something I've never wished for.

Yet the City of Salem is determined to force paid parking down downtown's throat. Why? The reason remains a mystery, like other recent ill-advised City decisions.

US Bank got an approval to cut down five large beautiful trees in downtown Salem. For no good reason. Three years ago the City's Public Works director, Peter Fernandez, made a promise to the US Bank president that the trees could be removed. 

Then flimsy reasons were conjured up in an attempt to justify the tree-killing decision. Same thing is happening with Third Bridge planning: a decision to build another bridge, which would channel people away from downtown, has been made without considering better and cheaper transportation alternatives.

Now we've got a rush by the City to install parking meters downtown. Again, with little or no consideration of whether this will solve the purported problems meters are supposed to solve; and with little or no listening to the downtown businesses that will be affected by a shift from free to paid parking.

The Downtown Parking Task Force project began hopefully enough last year. The original intent was to listen to the public first, to both the business owners and the customers. Hear them share their needs and dreams, perhaps in our Library’s auditorium, and from those conversations, develop potential strategies at open meetings.

Instead, Task Force and city staff members met at 7:30 a.m. in the library’s lower-level Anderson Room; seated in a “U” with their backs to the public they were meant to serve. As the months passed there was never an opportunity for the public to speak. 

Recently the Mayor, City Manager, members of the Parking Task Force, and other proponents of parking meters met with the Statesman Journal editorial board. I watched the entire hour-plus video of the session. I came away unconvinced that meters are needed.

Unfortunately, the Statesman Journal followed its usual policy of being on the side of whatever the City of Salem leadership and Chamber of Commerce are for, whether or not the public interest is being served. The resulting editorial, though annoyingly wishy-washy, supported moving ahead with parking meters -- even though it acknowledged that this could turn out to be a bad idea.

The Parking Task Force didn't survey downtown business owners to ask how they thought parking meters would affect them. Shameful.

Such is par for the course these days with the City of Salem. Expert advice and citizen input are ignored; the US Bank tree-killing debacle and looming Third Bridge disaster are further examples.

Read what downtown business owners and other citizens think about downtown parking meters here and here. These informed comments provide a lot of ammunition to shoot down the parking meter proposal. I have some additional skeptical bullets:

(1) Currently four large downtown businesses, such as Penney's, pay most of the parking tax that supports downtown parking garages and other parking expenses. If meters are installed, that tax goes away. This amounts to a wealth transfer to large corporations at the expense of downtown visitors. Penney's will save over $40,000 a year.

(2) Reportedly the Convention Center pays nothing for parking, yet benefits from the City parking structure right across the street. Other governmental entities apparently pay nothing for parking either. Why should big business and big government get a free parking ride?

(3) The main reason parking meters are being recommended by the Task Force is to pay for the capital and operating costs of downtown parking structures, which currently provide free parking to visitors. So why aren't parking meters planned for the structures? Why should onstreet parkers feed their meters in order to provide free parking to people who use the structures?

Now there is free onstreet parking, and free offstreet parking in the structures. If parking meters make downtown onstreet parking costly, then offstreet parkers should incur the same cost. After all, the purported purpose of the meters is to meet the cost of maintaining and operating the parking structures.

Those who use the structures should pay much or most of the costs associated with them. Logically, this seems obvious. Yet the Parking Task Force didn't recommend this. Here's my conspiracy theory about why:

In my experience as a frequent downtown visitor, the structures are more likely to be used by people heading to large businesses such as Penney's, and to the Salem Center mall. After all, skybridges connect the structures to these places.

There is no skybridge from a parking structure to the small businesses I have frequented for many years: RJ Dance Studio, Venti's, Beanery, Pacific Martial Arts, Great Harvest, etc. I use onstreet parking when I go to these small businesses, because it is much more convenient. And very rarely, if ever, have I had to park in a structure because I couldn't find an onstreet parking space.

Thus my suspicion is that the City of Salem is tilting toward large businesses, and away from small businesses, in this parking meter proposal. By using onstreet meter revenue to subsidize free parking in the structures, Penney's, Salem Center, and the Convention Center will continue to have free parking easily available to their customers -- while not having to pay any parking tax. 

Yet it is small businesses that make downtown Salem as attractive as it is. And it is small businesses which should be supported by City of Salem policies. Downtown Salem is on the edge of being vibrantly ascendent. It also is on the edge of sliding downhill.

Which side downtown moves toward will be affected by how attractive the area is to visitors, and thus to businesses. 

Already the City has authorized the killing of five beautiful trees that used to grace downtown's State Street. And the City is determined to build a Third Bridge that would funnel people away from downtown toward Keizer Station and points north.

Now the City wants to install parking meters, which means large businesses wouldn't have to pay their fair share, or indeed any share, of downtown parking costs. I'm not saying the City of Salem hates downtown small businesses. But I can understand why someone would come to that conclusion.

Don't elect Planned Parenthood haters to Salem-Keizer School Board

If you're a Salem-area resident who cares about providing the best education possible for our children, in the May 21 election be sure to vote for Cris Brantley, Nancy MacMoriss-Adix, and Rick Kimball.

They're running for the Salem-Keizer school board. Each is in favor of the district's Teen Outreach Program, TOP -- which is demonstrably effective:

TOP CURRICULUM
The TOP Changing Scenes Curriculum addresses many important teen topics, including:
  • Healthy relationships
  • Values
  • Communication
  • Examining influences
  • Goal setting
  • Decision making
  • Adolescent development and sexual health
  • Community service

TOP IS EFFECTIVE
TOP has demonstrated the following results:
    •  53% reduction in the risk of teen pregnancy or fathering a child
    •  52% reduction in the risk of school suspension
    •  60% reduction in the risk of course failure

I can't understand why anyone would be in favor of more teen pregnancies, school suspensions, and course failures. But some people (including write-in candidates) running for the Salem-Keizer school board are.

That's why it is important to vote for Brantley, MacMoriss-Adiz, and Kimball. Be sure to deposit your ballot at a drop site, because it is too late to mail your ballot and be sure it will arrive by May 21.

As reported by the Salem Statesman-Journal:

The health program is funded by a grant from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. It is taught by a school district teacher with help from a Planned Parenthood facilitator.

But those who hate Planned Parenthood, an organization that is highly effective in reducing both unwanted pregnancies and abortions through education about responsible sexual behavior and birth control, have falsely claimed that Planned Parenthood is "teaching health classes."

Anyone who doesn't respect truth shouldn't be on a school board.

Elect Cris Brantley, Nancy MacMoriss-Adix, and Rick Kimball. They care about educating children, not about pushing their own extreme political agenda and lies about the TOP program.

My Salem Weekly opinion piece about US Bank tree killings

I only had one request to make of the Salem Weekly editors: if you have to shorten my opinion piece about the City of Salem's outrageous approval of a US Bank request to cut down five beautiful Zelkova trees, please...

Don't take out my references to Tony Soprano and the Bada Bing Club. Pretty please. With New Jersey mobster frosting on top.

Happily, they didn't. "A promise is a promise" was published almost exactly as I wrote it. Here's the first Soprano's reference.

There was no good reason to remove the trees. None. Three times the city’s Shade Tree Committee recommended pruning them, not killing them. Salem’s urban forester agreed. So did independent arborists. Neighboring business owners wanted the five trees saved.

So why did Public Works director Peter Fernandez approve US Bank regional president Alan Allbritton’s application to have the trees removed? Here’s where the story starts to sound more like the New Jersey of Tony Soprano than supposedly squeaky-clean Salem.

Now, I want to assure Peter Fernandez and Alan Allbritton that I don't believe they are engaged in truly nefarious dealings. Some hyperbole and exaggeration is par for the course in most sorts of writing. 

But mildly nefarious? Sure. 

When I've described what happened here in Salem to people unacquainted with our city, the reaction has been "Wow, the tree cutting sounds so sleazy." 

My point exactly. 

Peter Fernandez ignored the thrice-repeated recommendation of the Shade Tree committee. Admitting that US Bank’s sidewalk liability concerns weren’t pertinent to his decision, he conjured up some pitifully weak reasons to cut down the trees. Each reason screamed “prune” to arborists, not kill.

Then the City of Salem sent a letter to tree removal opponents notifying them of Fernandez’ approval. Outrageously, it arrived on the very day of the appeal deadline. An attorney has told me that opponents had grounds to appeal. But its damn tough to appeal a City of Salem decision when you’re notified about it too late to legally do so.

In the grand scheme of things it could be argued that cutting down healthy large trees for no good reason doesn't rank very high on the scale of Outrageous Acts.

That may be.

However, this episode is a window that provides a view into how the current leadership of the City of Salem -- mayor, city manager, department heads, councilors -- go about making public policy decisions.

How much do they value citizen testimony? To what extent do they pay attention to facts and expert advice? Do special interests have more sway than the broad public interest? Are "political" decisions made first, with reasons drummed up later?

Time will offer up better answers to these questions.

Debate over a Third Bridge and downtown parking meters is continuing, and will heat up. How the City handles these issues will tell us a lot about whether Tony Soprano-style deal-making is taking hold in Salem.

Salem's Third Bridge planning staggers on to likely demise

If I was a betting man -- and Vegas placed odds on ill-advised city public works projects -- I'd put money on the City of Salem's Third Bridge project going down in well-deserved flames.

I wasn't able to attend last night's City Council hearing on the project. But thanks to a hot-off-the-blog post from Salem Breakfast on Bikes, I got a good feel for the increasing desperation of Third Bridge proponents.

With opposition increasing by the day, it's telling that Public Works director Peter Fernandez now is calling the latest iteration of the bridge/quasi-freeway design, the "Salem Alternative." Sounds like the $100,000 a month planning team is trying to earn its keep.

I'll admit that Salem Alternative has a better ring to it than 4-D, or whatever the heck the previous preferred design was called.

(If they'd called it 44-D, maybe at least the Third Bridge would have gotten a thumbs-up from subscribers to Big Boobs magazine; so far the vast majority of Salem-area residents appear to be saying No! to this $700 million waste of taxpayer money.)

But no matter what the Third Bridge is called, some plain facts remain: it isn't needed; it isn't wanted; and it can't be afforded. 

Statesman Journal editorial about 3rd Bridge "not even wrong"

Ooh! Here comes my theoretical physics-based putdown: "You're not even wrong!" Take that, Statesman Journal editorial board. 

Today's opinion piece about a proposed Third Bridge in Salem was so confusingly argued, it deserves the "not even wrong" -- a phrase attributed to physicist Wolfgang Pauli when he objected to incorrect or sloppy thinking.

Here's how I put it in my online comment on the editorial, "Third Bridge Remains a Sound Project."

The SJ says the bridge "remains a sound concept." Yet the SJ editorial admits ...

-- It won't be built for 15-20 years.
-- No one knows if it will be needed then.
-- No one knows if it will be wanted then.
-- No one knows if it can be afforded then.

Yet somehow something that is questionably needed, wanted, and afforded is a "sound concept"? This reflects a basic problem with how the Salem establishment (City Council, Statesman Journal, Chamber of Commerce) views the world.

A desired future for Salem is lacking. The public isn't involved in forming a coherent, consensual, community vision for the sort of place we want to become. Instead, we get more of the same -- reactive disjointed planning that responds to short-term "political" pressures (using that term in a broad sense) rather than long-term aspirations.

Playing into this, the editorial urges Salem to pursue a Third Bridge that isn't needed now, isn't wanted now, and can't be afforded now, yet maybe, perhaps, just might be, in 15-20 years -- for reasons unknown and unspecified. 

Instead of saying "THIS is the Salem we want to become, and THIS is why the Third Bridge is needed to help make that happen," advocates of the Salem River Crossing rely on vague assumptions about what might occur a few decades from now, hoping that somehow current plans for an unneeded, unwanted, unaffordable bridge will meld with an unknowable future.

Here's an alternative idea: form that future, rather than react to it. Listen to what Salem area residents want. Do we want a strong downtown, alternatives to automotive travel, thriving businesses and residences in walkable communities along the river? 

Decide what sort of place we want Salem to be, then, if necessary, design a river crossing that will enhance that vision.

I wrote those thoughts before coming across a Salem Breakfast on Bikes post along the same lines. Here's some excerpts from "SJ Fails to Take Own Advice: Whiffs on Third Bridge."

From an earlier note yesterday [by SJ editorial page editor Dick Hughes] on assault and reporting at Willamette:

But that also was a lesson for student journalists: To be effective, they can't just spout off. They have to back up opinions with evidence and they have to present all sides of an issue.

Instead of talking right over "objections to the project" and dismissing them by fiat and circular logic -"the bridge is needed" because we need a bridge! - the SJ refuses its own advice to "back up opinions with evidence" and "present all sides of an issue." 

(At least they did publish a counter-point from 1000 Friends just below the editorial, but is significant they did not hold one of those "editorial board" lunchtime meetings with critics and with supporters.  It's hard to see that the SJ has taken strong measures on both the reporting and the editorial side to investigate the project thoroughly.)

...WESD [Willamette Educational Service District] and Courthouse Square have got tons of reportorial resources applied to them.  The proposed giant bridge and highway is in cost more than an order of magnitude greater, hundreds of millions rather than tens of millions. 

By this calculation it is reasonable to ask whether 10x the staff time should be allocated to investigating claims and intellectual honesty in the DEIS [draft Environmental Impact Statement] about the giant bridge and highway!  The case is far from proved, and the SJ has an actual job to do in "backing up opinions with evidence" on a once-in-a-generation sized project.

Maybe most crucially, it is far from proven that Salem has done all it could do.

I'm sure there are good arguments to be made for building a Third Bridge. But I haven't seen them yet, and the Statesman Journal editorial didn't make any. 

A trend is evident when the SJ expresses its newpaper'ish collective opinion on important issues: the editorial board takes a position, but not a stand. This deserves the insult, "not even wrong." (See my post about the SJ's endorsement of Mitt Romney in 2012; also "not even wrong.")

Why? Because someone who is open and straightforward in arguing for a position either can convince others that she is right, or can be convinced that she is wrong -- since arguments based on facts and reasons can be rebutted.

The Statesman Journal's shaky "position" on the Third Bridge is that it's worth continuing to look into the possibility of another bridge across the Willamette, because maybe, someday, perhaps 20 years from now, it might be needed, wanted, and affordable. 

Though none of those things is true now. 

The SJ's maybe, someday attitude is at odds with the Third Bridge timetable on the Oregon Department of Transportation web site. Looks to me like a final decision is scheduled for mid-2014, with design and construction happening immediately after. 

As some commenters on the editorial said, given the importance of this issue the newpaper's editorial board should have sat down with proponents and opponents of a Third Bridge. Let each side make its best case. Assess the facts. Ponder alternative futures for downtown, west Salem, and other parts of Salem.

Then write a firm, factual, reasonable editorial that doesn't pussyfoot around.

Should Salem design, build, and pay for a Third Bridge, or not? Explain why the Statesman Journal came down on the side that it did. Then people can debate how valid those reasons were, and how accurate the facts backing up those reasons were.

Instead, readers of the Statesman Journal were given an editorial so wishy-washy it wasn't even wrong. Because being right or wrong means taking a coherent position on some subject, and the SJ didn't do that.

Ellis Island respects large trees more than US Bank & City of Salem do

Having noticed my series of outraged posts about the utterly needless approval by the City of Salem of a US Bank request to remove five large trees in front of the bank building in downtown Salem, recently someone sent me a photo of the Ellis Island National Monument in Upper New York Bay.

The photo was found via Google Maps. Since it was rather blurry, here's a similar photo I found on Google Images.

Do you see all of the large, leafy, beautiful trees in front of historic buildings?

If Ellis Island was transported into downtown Salem and transformed into a US Bank branch, bank president Alan Allbritton would have asked to have them cut them down. And City of Salem Public Works director would have allowed this, even though the City's Shade Tree Committee and expert arborists would have advised otherwise.

Thankfully, the federal government has more sense than the City of Salem and US Bank. Plus, there aren't any political shenanigans Involved with the Ellis Island trees. 

US Bank claimed that five beautiful Japanese Zelkova trees needed to be killed because they cut off sightlines to a building in Salem's Historic District. However, nothing in Salem's tree ordinance (Chapter 86) talks about criteria for removing trees there -- only planting trees there.

So Fernandez and Allbritton made stuff up to get around the plain fact that there was no good reason, none at all, to cut down the trees. They also seemingly lost the ability to understand simple English, such as the familiar word "prune." 

(The thrice-repeated recommendation of the Shade Tree Committee, should any problems with the size of the trees be apparent.)

I took this photo before three of the five Zelkovas were cut down.

This was an unjustified murder of three innocent trees. Hopefully more innocent blood sap won't be shed from the remaining two trees, saved from the initial slaughter by baby birds sheltering in their branches.

Historic buildings can coexist with beautiful large trees. There are plenty of examples of this elsewhere in downtown Salem, as on Ellis Island. Unfortunately, politics trumped sound decision-making in this case. 

Arborist demolishes City of Salem's reasons for removing US Bank trees

I've said it many times before, and I'll likely be saying it many times more:

There was no good reason for the City of Salem (Oregon) to approve a request by US Bank to remove five healthy, beautiful, large Japanese Zelkova trees.

All signs point to the decision being politically motivated. That's shameful. Being an avid fan of The Sopranos, I would expect decisions by local officials in New Jersey to be politically slanted. But here in Oregon we expect cleaner city government.

Below you'll find the expert views of Woody Dukes, an arborist for 39 years, 25 with the City of Salem.

Woody testified at the January 9 meeting of the City's Shade Tree Committee, which three times -- three -- recommended that the Zelkovas be pruned rather than removed. Yet Peter Fernandez, City of Salem Public Works director, somehow granted US Bank regional president Alan Allbritton's removal request.

Allbritton is the incoming president of the Salem Chamber of Commerce. The Chamber of Commerce is a big backer of the City of Salem's crusade to spend $600-800 million on a Third Bridge across the Willamette which hardly anyone other than the Chamber and Realtor's Association believes is needed.

In 2010 Fernandez promised Allbritton that the five US Bank Trees would be removed, even though Allbritton hadn't gone through the prescribed application process. 

After Allbritton did, and tree experts (along with the Shade Tree Committee) said "prune, don't kill," Fernandez kept his promise to the US Bank President -- while breaking any promise he may have made upon taking office to put facts and the public interest above special interests. 

Here's some information from long-time city arborist Woody Dukes which will strengthen the suspicions of so many tree and bird lovers that the City of Salem and US Bank had no good reason to cut down the trees.

Two remain. They need to stay. Nothing will bring back the three trees which have been killed. Saving the last two trees may restore some measure of good will toward City officials and US Bank. 

---------------------------
Excerpts from an email message arborist Woody Dukes sent me:

Hi Brian. I went through the Shade Tree Advisory Committee minutes from the Jan 9, 2013 hearing at Pringle Hall with regard to the Ladd & Bush Bank request to remove the Zelcovas on the State St side of their building.

I also went through the "Background, Findings and Decision regarding the removal of the State Street Trees (302 State Street S: Ladd & Bush Building—US Bank) from March 12, 2013 that came from Peter Fernandez, Director of Public Works for the City of Salem [quoted in red, along with Allbritton quotes].

Here is what I gleaned out of them:

From Peter Fernandez in his "Findings" on March 12, 2013:

"1. Aesthetics. There is a difference of opinion between the tree removal proponents and opponents as to the aesthetic quality of the trees. One faction believes that the mature trees provide a visual appeal. The other believes that the difference in size between the Commercial and State Street trees creates a poor aesthetic."

The City allowed the trees on the Commercial St side to be removed. The differences in sizes directly relates to the removal of those trees, not the remaining ones on State although that is now the case.  

"While the aesthetics of mature trees may be debated, the record indicates that “the [zelkova] trees have grown beyond their anticipated design."

How do they know that these trees have grown beyond the anticipated design? I was told by Wilbur Bluhm, one of the committee members that decided on the locations and genus/species of trees to be planted in this program that these Zelkovas were chosen specifically for the bank. He is one of the most respected horticulturalists in the area if not even broader recognition. He was a consultant for the "Sunset Western Garden Book".

(Also Professor Emeritus, Oregon State University Extension Service, and Horticultural Consultant, Board Member, Rhododendron Species Foundation, member of the Native Plant Society and teaches Horticulture part time at Chemeketa Community College.)

"3. Additional maintenance requirements due to leaves and roots. The proponents of removing the trees state that the existing trees create additional maintenance requirements due to dropping leaves in the fall and root encroachment into the stormwater drainage facilities. Any deciduous tree planted in the public right of way, by definition, will create leaf litter in the fall." 

The City accepts this basic issue with all trees.

"The record indicates, however, that the Princeton Sentry Ginko trees planted on Commercial Street drop their leaves in a more concentrated manner than the existing Japanese Zelkova trees. ... The record also indicates that staff believes that at least one of the Zelkova trees may, in fact, be impacting the stormwater drainage facilities at this location."

Why not remove all trees and plant Princeton Sentry Ginkgo trees if this particular leaf-drop problem is 'corrected' by such replacement? Does this mean that any and all future tree removals in the downtown core (and elsewhere) will be replaced by these ginkgo trees?

Has it been proven "in fact" that stormwater drainage facilities have been impacted by the tree(s)? What impact? What is the plan to correct this impact after removal of the offending tree(s)? In FACT, there are NO storm drains on the State Street side of the bank.

Are they saying here that the possible impact is to below-ground infrastructure? Can we see in writing what this impact consists of? 

If trees are going to be removed, the reasons must be concrete and the tangible damage be shown both in writing and with visual evidence of said damage incurred with proof that the tree(s) is/are all or in part responsible. Permits for any action should not be issued on such 'loose' or speculative language.

---------------------

From Ryan Allbritton's testimony at the Jan 9th STAC hearing:

"Three years ago they had requested all trees on Commercial Street and State Street (adjacent to the bank) be removed and were told by the City officials to hold off on the State St side for two reasons; one being an issue in the community of having all nine trees taken out at once and that future curb work on State Street would require the removal of the remaining trees. The City replaced the curb along Commercial Street and then replanted small trees. The bank was told they could do half the tree removal now (i.e. 2010) and could do the other half in two years (i.e. 2012)." 

The bank, as they stated in their testimony on Jan 9th before the Shade Tree Advisory Committee, said that they "had a deal". From what is written here, it seems to me that there was a "deal" and that Fernandez's decision on March 12th 2013 was actually made in 2010.

[boldface emphasis added by me, because this shameful seeming fact needs to be emphasized]

"They [US Bank] are now asking the City through the STAC's recommendation to let them replace the trees that are on the North side of the building in fulfillment of the agreement they have with the City [in 2010]. The curb on that side has been worked on but is not complete and they state the city will need to remove them to fix the curb; it causes a liability to their customers and the citizens as a whole."

The City has already performed the work of replacing the curb without any major issues with tree roots AND without removing the trees.

From Brian Hines' piece quoting Peter Fernandez in his decision to issue the permit:

Fernandez says sidewalk liability concerns are “not pertinent to the tree removal decision." Yet US Bank officials have been telling people that the trees needed to be cut down for this reason.

I believe that Fernandez should have taken the advice of the STAC [Shade Tree Advisory Committee] and had the trees pruned.

They probably would be improperly pruned by removing more than the recommended maximum of leaf removal of 25% each year because they would have been raised all around, reduced in height by some unknown amount and pruned back from the building. Then, if the work performed was not satisfactory, the bank should have been allowed another appeal to (try and) press their case again.  

Michael Davis promises to revitalize Salem Statesman Journal

Last Friday I spent an enjoyable hour at the Salem City Club, watching Michael Davis, the new executive editor of the Statesman Journal, charm everybody in the room (so far as I could tell). 

I sat in the back. Since this wasn't an expressive gospel-spouting church service, I didn't jump up, throw my arms in the air, and yell "Praise be!" "Hallelujah" "Tell it like it is, Brother Michael" or such.

But I felt like it. Instead, I kept muttering to my closest seatmate Yes, Good, Absolutely, and other affirmations of the fresh vision Davis has for how the Statesman Journal will handle news and opinion.

Before the talk I'd told my new City Club friend (I joined recently, partly because Loustic Catering offers up a great lunch with a vegetarian option) that the Statesman Journal had refused to publish in its print edition an opinion piece I'd written with Carole Smith about the City of Salem's atrocious decision to approve US Bank's request to cut down five beautiul healthy downtown trees for no good reason.

So I listened carefully for signs that even though this time the Statesman Journal had said "no" to a well-written, timely, provocative opinion piece about a local issue that has attracted widespread interest, such won't happen again.

I came away feeling pretty good.

Davis said that he's only been in town for six weeks. That isn't long enough to shake things up at a newspaper that needs some rocking and rolling. I suspect Davis is feeling his way along, getting to know both Salem and the staff of the Statesman Journal.

Michael Davis previously was executive editor of the Lafayette Journal & Courier in Indiana.

This is another Gannett paper which, unsurprisingly, has a web site that looks almost exactly like the Statesman Journal's; so the SJ's online presence will look familiar to Davis, given that Gannett takes a cookie cutter approach in this area.

Along this line, at the City Club meeting Davis was asked how the items on the Statesman Journal's national page of news that comes from USA Today, also a Gannett paper, was chosen. Davis replied that it isn't the Statesman Journal's choice, though he wishes it was.

The SJ's web site design and USA Today's force-fed page shows that Davis doesn't have complete freedom to remake Salem's newspaper. But from his City Club remarks, it sure sounds like he is out to change the paper's "corporate culture."

Which hasn't reflected the moderate make-up of the Salem-area citizenry, almost equally divided between Democrats and Republicans, liberals and conservatives, progressives and traditionalists. 

I agreed with most of his "newbie" insights into the town I've lived in or near since 1977.

Salem is cooler than it appears to outsiders, especially those who compare it with Portland or Eugene. Our creative class (not a great term; best I can come up with) is largely hidden away in isolated outposts of artistry, eccentricity, and cutting-edge expressiveness.

It sounds like Davis wants to expose this Other Side of Salem, which has mostly been ignored by the Statesman Journal's news and opinion reporting for as many years as my senior citizen mind can remember.

I'm reminded of the familiar humorous phrase, reality has a liberal bias. Yet it isn't funny when inconvenient truths get downplayed by what Davis correctly called our "paper of record."

Meaning, the Statesman Journal hasn't been nearly as passionate about reporting unseemly goings-on associated with conservative City of Salem or Marion County elected officials as the paper has, say, with the Willamette ESD -- which has been taken to task for a myriad of sins, many of them much less serious than, say, allowing Courthouse Square to fall into virtually complete ruin, or, say, conspiring to ruin downtown (I'm thinking Third Bridge, parking meters, and killing of trees, plus meddling with downtown association activities)

So kudos to you, Michael Davis, for saying all the right things last Friday. I believe that you really do want to make the Statesman Journal into a newspaper for all area residents, not just "the 50%" on the right side of the political spectrum.

Shake things up enough, and I might even be able to forgive the newspaper's extremely poorly argued 2012 endorsement of Mitt Romney for President. (Note: I said might; that editorial will be long remembered by me as an example of poor journalism.)

Salem's US Bank tree cutting needs to be featured on The Daily Show

Us opponents of the senseless cutting-down of five beautiful Japanese Zelkova trees in downtown Salem are on a pretty good publicity roll: 

A few days ago the Statesman Journal published online a guest opinion by Carole Smith and me, "US Bank tree removal decision was horribly flawed." Today the paper printed my letter to the editor, titling it "City was wrong to let US Bank cut down trees." Carole has submitted her own letter, which hopefully will be published soon.

(Comment away on the guest opinion and letter, especially if you think we've expressed ourselves brilliantly and are on the proper side of truth, justice, baby birds, and shade trees.)

But there's more publicizing to be done. This afternoon, while mowing the grass, my mind popped up the best idea of all.

This crazy US bank tree cutting drama needs to be featured on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart!

Freaking f#!%ing genius, Brian! I told myself, as I do so often -- yet usually with considerably less reason.

The story is a natural for The Daily Show. That's obvious. I just can't decide which member of their news team would be the best fit to come out to Salem and report on the delicious absurdities of our downtown drama.

I like John Oliver a lot. But his English accent could be distracting.

Jason Jones probably would be best. He could project a requisite blend of sarcasm and outrage. Humorously, of course. Or I could easily see Samantha Bee doing some killer interviews with the story's Cast of Characters.

We've got at least...

The five trees themselves. Three have been cut down. Two remain. The arc of the story depends on what happens with the last two (more about that below).

Baby birds. They are what saved the two trees from being killed in the first wave of chainsaw attacks. Interviews with local Audubon types in bird suits would be in order.

Crazed French chef. David Rosales would be pleased, I'm sure, to re-enact his screaming protest of the tree-killings inside the US Bank lobby. 

Ambitious Public Works director. Peter Fernandez wants to spend $700 million or so on a Third Bridge that hardly anybody but the Chamber of Commerce and Realtor's Association wants. He approved the tree removals even though he was advised not to by City tree experts and its Shade Tree Committee.

Ambitious US Bank president. That is Ryan Allbritton who -- surprise! -- also is the incoming president of the Chamber of Commerce. 

Tree hugging opponents. Ah, one would be me, an Oregon stereotype: gray haired/bearded senior citizen skateboarder, electric car owner, vegetarian, save the Earth'er. Another, my comrade opponent: Carole Smith, downtown businesswoman and general pain-in-the-butt to conservative City politicians.

Marvelous scenes in a The Daily Show investigative bit present themselves to my imagination. And I'm not even a professional. For sure our Salemia team -- David Jenkins, a screenwriter, and Mike Perron, a person hard to describe -- could come up with some great ideas here.

I'll just give a few examples that easily came to mind:

Interviewer: Mr. Allbritton, I understand that a French chef was arrested in your lobby for screaming in outrage about what a giant U.S. bank had done. If this is illegal, why isn't most of the American public behind bars?

Allbritton: [mute irritated look]

------------------

Interviewer: Mr. Fernandez, you are the Public Works director of an Oregon town that is proud of winning 37 consecutive Tree City USA awards. Your department received an application to cut down five beautiful healthy downtown trees. The City's tree experts, independent arborists, and members of the public all advised you to prune, rather than kill, the trees. So naturally you decided to save the trees, right?

Fernandez: No, I issued a decision to kill them. 

Like I said, it's the ending of The Daily Show investigative bit that is in question here. This depends on whether US Bank and the City persist in cutting down the last two trees.

Speaking for the opponents, I'd much prefer to have a lighter-hearted positive ending.

Via this blog post, I now declare to US Bank that I am offering to devote some of my retired time, which could have gone to being a greeter at WalMart, to becoming a volunteer leaf raker for the downtown Salem US Bank branch.

I've heard from reliable sources (a term that makes me sound more like a real journalist than a blogger, assuming this is a step up) that US Bank wanted the trees removed because when they drop leaves in the fall, customers track them into the lobby.

Well, Mr. Allbritton, I'm your leaf-collecting man.

I live out in rural south Salem. We have some large oak trees around our house that shed more leaves than the remaining Zelkova trees at your bank do. I can handle leaf-picking-up duties for both our trees and your trees. 

Glad to help.

Even though it looks to me like US Bancorp made over five billion dollars last year, I can understand why bank executives might not want to spend money on picking up leaves from some beautiful trees on a public street adjoining the Ladd & Bush downtown branch. 

I'd do it for free, because this is the only remaining reason I can think of why US Bank would want to cut down the last two trees. Three of five have been removed, reducing any possible minor problems with them (such as sightlines to the building) by 60%.

Tree experts and the City's own urban forester say that pruning can resolve any other problems, such as branches being too close to the building. Liability issues associated with any future sidewalk problems that could be caused by roots isn't a concern; this was made clear in Fernandez' March 12 decision document.

All I ask -- and this is a "please" not a must -- is that I be able to wear a US Bank baseball cap while I pick up the leaves. This would show passers by that I'm someone officially associated with the bank, and just a crazy senior citizen skateboarder, not a crazy street person.

It'd be cool if the end of The Daily Show bit showed us all -- bank officials, City staff, opponents -- sitting down in Rosale's restaurant and sharing a "no hard feelings" toast together. Of course, there would have to be some humor here also. 

How about if bank president Ryan Allbritton doesn't like the taste of the French wine and starts screaming at Rosales, almost turning over a table. Then stops himself just in time... with a grin. Hug by Rosales. "We're brothers, man." 

The other possible ending? Not so heart-warming, if all five trees have been cut down. I'd rather not envision it. Let's be positive.

Save the last two trees, US Bank. You'd come out looking better in a The Daily Show segment. Also, in the eyes of the tree-loving public. 

Write US Bank and tell them you'd like to see a happier ending to the tree story. Just three dead trees, not five. 

james.allbritton@usbank.com  
victoria.shinn@usbank.com
david.hammes@usbank.com 

What Statesman Journal doesn't want you to read about US Bank trees

Being a writer, I'm used to rejection notices. But this one hurt more than usual.

Because the cause I had written about was saving the last two beautiful US Bank trees in downtown Salem, which are on the chopping block after the City of Salem granted the bank's request to cut down five marvelous Zelkova trees.

The City's Shade Tree Committee said no, no, no to the request. Three times. The City's urban forester and independent arborists said any problems with the trees could be addressed by pruning, not killing them.

Download Shade Tree Committee minutes 

Yet Peter Fernandez, Salem Public Works Director, approved the tree removals anyway.

This was after the regional president of US Bank, Ryan Allbritton, reminded Fernandez that three years ago he had promised Allbritton the trees would be removed -- leaving aside the inconvenient fact that the City's tree ordinance requires that removal requests in the downtown Historic District go through the Shade Tree Committee, not be approved via Imperial Fiat by Fernandez.

The whole affair reflects very poorly on the City of Salem and US Bank.

But Carole Smith, a downtown businesswoman and resident, and I hold out hope that the city and bank can salvage some good will from the psyches of appropriately outraged tree-loving citizens by letting the last two trees remain.

(They apparently are still standing only because migrating birds, which seem to have more legal rights than trees, are sheltering in the Zelkovas; when the birds go, so do the last two trees.)

Wanting the public to be as informed as possible about the injustices being inflicted on both the trees and Salem residents who value them, I wrote a 500 word guest opinion, got an OK from co-submitter Carole, and sent it off to the Statesman Journal a few days ago.

Here it is. (I'll also include it as a continuation to this post.)

Download Opinion piece - US Bank trees

Last night an editorial page staffer said that our piece had been rejected for the print edition. I fired off an intense email asking why. Our guest opinion was timely, factual, well written (in my non-humble opinion), provocative, and indicative of broader problems with how City of Salem staff function, or not, as public servants.

I was told by editorial page editor Dick Hughes that with the Oregon legislature in session, the Statesman Journal has gotten quite a few guest opinion submissions. In response, I again appealed to Hughes and executive editor Michael Davis that a timely local subject of interest to the Salem community deserves space on the paper's opinion pages.

Maybe the Statesman Journal will put our guest opinion online. Maybe Carole and I will be able to have letters to the editor published.

[Update: later today Dick Hughes emailed me that our piece was online at the Statesman Journal web site. Of course, it also would have been if the newspaper had chosen to publish it in the print edition. So Carole and I are thankful. But not that thankful. Links to other stories and letters to the editor about the removal of the US Bank trees can be found here.]

And maybe those last two trees will be cut down before people in Salem are aware of what a horrible decision it was to remove the five US Bank trees rather than prune them, as tree experts recommended.

Years ago Peter Fernandez made a promise to Ryan Allbritton that he would accede to the incoming President of the Salem Chamber of Commerce's request to cut down the trees. Well, I've made my own promise: to the two remaining trees that I will do what I can to save them. 

Bad public policy decisions are more difficult to carry out when the public is broadly aware of them. Thus Carole and I want to make as many people as possible in Salem aware of how unnecessary and unjust the death-sentencing of five beautiful downtown trees is. 

Pass on the word. Legally we may not be able to stop the remaining trees from being cut down. However, as we say in the opinion piece:

Nothing will bring back the three wonderful trees that have been reduced to stumps. However, at the moment two equally beautiful trees remain at the corner of State and Commercial. 

Since there was no good reason to cut down any of the five trees, that no-good-reason has been reduced by 60% with the destruction of three trees. Some good will for the City of Salem and US Bank can be salvaged if they belatedly acknowledge this.

Please, Peter Fernandez, City Public Works Director, and Ryan Allbritton, US Bank regional president: save the remaining trees. 

If they too are cut down for no good reason, their absence will speak volumes about how solid facts, expert advice, and public testimony mean next to nothing in how the City of Salem operates these days.

[Update: Ryan Albritton can be contacted at james.allbritton@usbank.com; Peter Fernandez at pfernandez@cityofsalem.net]

Read on for the rest of our guest opinion...

Sweet! I get paid to complain about Salem.

Twitter rocks! Thanks to whoever put up the tweet that I saw on my feed a few days ago, directing me to this link -- where I read the info below.

[Note: it's too late to take part in this research, so don't all excited about what you'll do with your $100.]

Salem Community Interviews

11g, a consumer research group, is seeking people to talk about how they experience life in Salem and fulfill their passions. We will be conducting in-home or in-office interviews from Tuesday, April 30th through Wednesday, May 1st. 

To be considered for this study, you must be at least 21 years old who lives or works in Salem, OR. Share your opinions, ideas, and experiences with us! 

Interviews will last about 60 minutes and participants will be compensated $100 for their time.

If you are interested in taking part in our research study, please fill out the information and questions below. Your completed responses will be sent to Maria Porta at innovation@gannett.com

Here are the types of people we are looking for:

Salem is my epicenter
I live and work in Salem, it’s the center of world. I know there are other places I could go, but I have everything I need right here in my own backyard. I don’t see myself living or working anywhere else. Salem is home. 

When the whistle blows, I’m gone
My job has me working in Salem, but I’ve never lived here. I almost never linger in town once the workday is done. Even though I spend a lot of time in Salem, I do very little outside of work hours in town.

Living in Salem has made me lame
Is Salem really this boring? Is nothing ever going on? How do I find things to do? People told me Salem was a great place to be, but I’m not sure how long Salem will be home since it’s turning me into a lame person. I’m finding it hard to do the things I love. 

Salem is the cat's meow
Salem is the best place to live and I'm not shy about letting people know. Whether it's championing a city improvement team or helping people know what's going on in Salem, I'm the go-to person. I enjoy being a familiar, friendly face for Salem always rooting for its success.

Keeping the pride in Salem's musicians
I play a critical role in creating an environment for budding musicians in our area. Fundraising, organizing events and parents, and sewing uniforms have become the center of my world. Taking my responsibilities seriously is important in maintaining Salem's reputation as a place for raising great musicians.

Ultimate weekend warrior
Salem provides easy access to the things I like to do on the weekends. I love the outdoors and wanted to live in a town where every weekend I can enjoy nature - fishing, hiking, skiing, mountain biking, etc. - all are a quick drive. 

I’m always a step behind

I am always missing out on the fun. I hear about great Salem events after they’ve already happened, but can’t seem to catch them beforehand to make plans. It’s frustrating that I can’t find a publication or source for all town activities. Word of mouth doesn’t cut it either. 

Adjusting to life in Salem
Being new in town has been an adjustment. It’s hard to get a feel for what Salem is really like or how to get things done. I’m hoping Salem can become a great place to live, but right now it just feels so different than where I came from. 

Salem is the right size for me
I came to Salem from either a larger city or smaller town and found the perfect sized place to call home. Everything I was missing before I am now able to do in Salem like build a family, raise my kids, find new friends, or meet a future spouse. Salem is the perfect fit for me.

Barely making it by
Living in Salem has been a constant struggle. It’s hard to find a job to make ends meet and life events have left me living paycheck to paycheck. I can no longer afford basic things like my mortgage, my car, or utilities. I am desperately trying to stay afloat. 

Devoted Salem civil servant
Serving the Salem community has been my dream and vocation for many years. I devote my life to making Salem and/or Oregon a better place to live and work. Working for the government isn’t an easy life either - salary cuts, long hours, and frustrations that I’m not making an impact. Regardless I won’t give up on my civic commitment.

In pursuit of the next big thing
I am an outdoor hobby junkie. I’m always searching for the next fun thing. Diving intensely into my passions gives me the adrenaline I crave, so I’ve gotten pretty good at keeping my ear to the ground on the next hot outdoor sport or secret spot. It’s also made me the go-to person, I love trying out everything so I can pass my intel to others.

Regular readers of my rants about Salem won't find it hard to guess which type of person I chose: Living in Salem has made me lame.

This isn't really true, of course. But that description struck me as coming closest to how I feel about the town that I both love and hate passionately. 

I wrote back to the research group, offering up samples of my many blog posts about Salem's lameness. This got me a phone pre-interview checkover. I passed, which earned me close to ninety pleasurable minutes with main interviewer Maria and two other people who mostly listened and took notes.

Kudos to whoever at the Salem Statesman Journal is supporting this consumer research effort (the research is being carried out by a group that does market research for Gannett, which owns the SJ and many other newspapers, including USA Today).

I've rarely experienced such rapt attention to what I said. Maria started off by telling me that I'd feel like I was doing most of the talking, which for sure I did. Also, that there were no right or wrong answers, which I'd already assumed.

It was like having a very non-directive psychotherapy session where I got to free-associate at length. Except at the beginning I was handed an envelope with money in it, so I was being paid to vent my feelings instead of being charged for this privilege. 

I felt great afterwards.

There really is a lot of positive power involved with genuine listening. These guys clearly were interested in what I had to say, because they came to my house, sat in my living room for almost an hour and a half, and handed me an envelope with cash in it.

I'm not a very good listener, I must admit.

Often I'm thinking of what I want to say in reply while someone is still talking. Hopefully this experience taught me something about how to attentively pay attention to another person. Maria knew how to do that. (Of course, it's her job.)

By letting me ramble beyond the point where I normally would have stopped talking -- because usually even verbose me eventually feels, "Dude, you've got to shut up and let the other person get a word in" -- researcher Maria drew me into answering her questions in some subtle in-depth ways that surprised even me. 

I guess this is sort of akin to brainstorming. Or again, non-directive psychotherapy. I felt so accepted, so un-judged, that even when I had a tinge of This is going to sound stupid; maybe I shouldn't say it, I'd end up feeling Oh, what the hell; blurt it out.

So actually the title of this post isn't true.

I ended up saying a lot of positive things about Salem, including the people and places here that give me a lot of meaningful pleasure. I went into the interview anticipating that I'd mostly complain about Salem's lameness. At the end, I felt considerably better about the town I've called home for thirty-six years.

I have no idea how this consumer research will be used. I don't know if what I told the interviewers will make any difference to anybody at Gannett or the Statesman Journal. 

But I do know that the interview experience had an effect on me. So thanks to Maria and the other two guys (whose names I've forgotten) for that. I learned something about effective listening, and the creative power of letting someone feel that whatever they say and think is OK.

In a sense what happened in my living room today is what I hope Salem can steadily move toward: being a place where people with diverse ways of looking upon the world can blend into a supportive community that values openness, eccentricity, quirkiness, blue-sky thinking/feeling, and an optimistic whatever attitude toward the future.

Maria ended up with some appealingly philosophical questions that I can't remember exactly (mostly I remember saying to her questions, "Wow, good question). I do recall semi-mangling a quote from a book that I'd read this morning.

Here's the unmangled passage from a book sent to me by the publisher for a pre-publication review. In his "God Revised: How Religion Must Evolve in a Scientific Age," Galen Guengerich writes:

Nomi goes on to explain that, by denying themselves the pleasures of this world, Mennonites believe they'll be first inline to enjoy the pleasures of the next world. As a teenager, however, Nomi says her concern isn't what happens after she dies, but rather how to endure the absence of life before death.

The absence of life before death.

I'm a senior citizen, not a teenager, but that's what I'm concerned about also. More life! That's what I want from Salem; that's what I want from me (not that there is any difference between I and me... and with that pseudo-Zen thought I shut up).

Salem needs more downtown congestion, not less

Mind-opening. Intuitively persuasive while being counter-intuitive. An appealing vision for what downtown Salem (Oregon) could be, but isn't now.

A walkable streetscape where it is tougher to get around by car than at present. 

That's one of the counter-intuitive lessons I learned from a great Breakfast on Bikes post about Jeffrey Tumlin's talk at the Salem Library on walkable cities.

I'd never thought about car transportation in this way before. 

The Traffic Engineer v. Economist

One favorite idea was to underscore in a table the difference between the way an economist looks at the value captured by a congested roadway full of people on foot, on bike, in bus, and moving slowly in cars, and the way a traffic engineer sees the same congested road.  Tumlin's big on shifting the conversation from engineering analysis and metaphors to economic ones.

	Level of Service
Traffic Engineer	A	F
Economist	F	A

A traffic engineer sees rapid, free-moving traffic as an "A."  But an economist sees only through-traffic and empty space on the road, with no people stopping and spending money.  A traffic engineer sees congestion as a failed roadway, as an "F," but an economist sees a vibrant streetscape full of people lingering and spending. 

Their perspectives are really reciprocals of each other.  But it shouldn't be so difficult:  When people slow down and want to linger, they spend more!

And a city whose congestion problems are solved is like Detroit - depopulated and desolate.  Only by ruining your city, he said, can you solve congestion.

Brilliant. 

Remember, we'll not talking about long range freeway travel here, where people are moving by car with a distinct purpose to get from Point A to Point B. That's why we have bypasses and such, like Front Street in Salem, for people who don't want to have anything to do with downtown.

But then there's the great example of Sisters in central Oregon, a place my wife and I visit frequently. You're zipping along in your car at 60 mph or so, then you hit Sisters. Two lanes. Lots of stop signs. You crawl for a mile or two through downtown.

Enjoyably. Because Sisters is a charming town, a blend of cowboy/artist chic (with an emphasis on quilting, an art form that I've come to appreciate more after spending so much time in Sisters). 

Driving slowly through downtown, you see places that make you want to park and get out of your car. Once you're walking, you feel comfortable crossing the two lane Main Street and walking along the sidewalks, because cars are going less than 25 mph. 

Downtown Salem, on the other hand, has a much carcentric frantic feel, with all of the one-way three-lane streets.

Today I wanted to stop at the Court Street Beanery coffeehouse after getting a haircut in Keizer. I couldn't drive directly to the Beanery. It takes some figuring how to navigate the one-ways even for someone like me who is familiar with downtown. A first-time visitor would be much more confused.

If downtown Salem was like downtown Sisters, I'd be happy to find a parking place several blocks away, then have a pleasant relaxed walk down narrow streets with a pedestrian-friendly feel. Instead, Salem encourages the Point A to Point B approach; by and large visitors aren't drawn to an entire enticing area, but particular destinations.

More car congestion means a more vibrant downtown. Jeffries made that clear.

Tumlin used a slide from New York City to show how removing curb lanes and/or parking stalls to create more walking space - and tighter carspace - can dramatically increase retail activity.

Read the entire post. This is the vision for downtown Salem that citizens need to expect City officials to start embracing. To re-vitalize downtown, walkers have to be given more respect than cars.  

My impressions of Salem city council meeting on Third Bridge

I haven't been much involved with the debate over whether Salem needs a third bridge over the Willamette River. I've read newspaper stories, followed posts on the always-interesting Salem Breakfast on Bikes blog, and talked with people who have some insider perspectives on what's going on.

However, I was pretty much a blank slate when I fired up CCTV's stream of Monday's City Council meeting, which featured a continuation of a public hearing on the Third Bridge Project. It took about an hour and a half to get to that agenda item, which struck me as bad form.

Lots of people were there to get three minutes before a microphone to offer up how they felt about the costly project (over $600 million I believe, with solid funding sources unspecified). Most of them had to go to work the next day. Most, I assume, had gotten to the council meeting by when it started, 6:30 pm.

Why not schedule a special meeting where this was the only agenda item? I didn't watch every minute of the testimony; seemed like it continued for over two hours. So some people who wanted to testify had to sit there from 6:30 pm until after 10:00 pm. The City could have made it easier on them.

Assuming the City of Salem really wants to hear from the public at public hearings. I didn't come away feeling this is the case. Admittedly, part of my impression was influenced by conversations I've had with people who have considerable experience with the City's public hearings.

"Decisions are already made before the meeting," they tell me. "City of Salem staff and elected officials don't care what the public has to say. They politely thank people for testifying, but don't give a rip about their testimony if it conflicts with the predetermined planned outcome."

I heard quite a bit at the April 22 City Council meeting to support that point of view. Early on, someone read a letter from a woman who couldn't attend the hearing, yet wanted to share her frustrations with the City's public participation process in the Third Bridge Project.

It was deeply moving.

I recall that she'd been involved in Salem civic affairs for more than fifty years. She said that she had never encountered anything so shameful as how the City treats ordinary citizens who want to provide input into a project that will displace many homes and businesses, and forever change the character of Salem.

Other people made similar comments. All opponents of the bridge. None of the "Chamber of Commerce types" (a loose term, yet one which predicted quite well what a testifier who fit that description was going to say) had any problems with feeling heard by City staff or elected officials.

Opponents did. And this is a management problem the City Council, Mayor, and City Manager should address. Good decisions happen when all points of view are seriously considered. I mean, seriously. A smile and a "thank you for your testimony" doesn't cut it.

I've been an Executive Service manager in state government. I've been the executive director of a non-profit health policy organization that did groundbreaking work here in Oregon and stimulated similar efforts across the country. And I completed the course requirements for a Ph.D. in Systems Science.

Salem is a complex system. Land use and transportation patterns are complex systems. The values, goals, and life styles of area residents blend, interact, and communicate in complex systemic ways. 

Governmental decision-makers need to have their eyes, ears, and minds wide open during public hearings and other opportunities where they are able to gather information on a proposal like the Third Bridge. I heard lots of specific, detailed, factual testimony that made me think, "Wow, great points; the City really needs to consider this."

However, I'm betting that what's been said at the public hearings will make very little difference in how the Third Bridge planning proceeds. Echoing the aforementioned woman's testimony, that's a shame. 

It's a shame because I'm idealistic enough to believe that public servants, paid or volunteer, should actually serve the public. (Yeah, I know, that's a shocking idea in these days of political cynicism.) Not themselves. Not special interests. Not the voting bloc which elected them.

The public. 

Whenever I get one of our cars serviced at the dealership where we bought it, a customer satisfaction questionnaire is emailed to me. The car company seems to genuinely care about how well I was treated by staff at the dealership. If I had an unresolved problem, they want my phone number so they can talk to me about it.

I've never gotten anything similar from a government agency after sharing my views at a public hearing, and then following along to see whether my ideas seemed to have been considered by decision-makers.

I wish taxpayer-paid public servants cared half as much about how well they're serving the public as private businesses do. From what I saw at the Salem City Council hearing a few days ago, the City of Salem would be wise to do some "customer satisfaction" surveying. Then take those findings to heart. 

On Earth Day, I file an appeal to save Salem's US Bank trees (two remain)

Excellent Earth Day timing by my attorney and me. At 3 pm today Sean Malone emailed me a letter to hand-deliver to Pete Fernandez, City of Salem Public Works Director, and Ryan Allbritton, US Bank Regional President. 

The letter notifies the person who authorized five beautiful Japanese Zelkova trees to be cut down, and the person who requested the trees be removed, that I'm filing an appeal of the decision.
Download Appeal letter to Fernandez and Allbritton
Download Exhibit A -- Appeal letter

I had just enought time before my Tai Chi class in downtown Salem to wish one of the two remaining trees "Happy Earth Day!" and "Thank you for being such a beautiful tree" after handing Allbritton's letter to someone sitting at a desk in the US Bank lobby.

Where we go from here is up to Fernandez and Allbritton.

My attorney -- a highly competent lawyer -- considers that the City of Salem failed to follow its own tree ordinance when it denied affected persons/opponents of the tree removal decision the right to appeal.

So my appeal concerns both the removal approval itself (which went against the recommendation of the City's Shade Tree Advisory Committee and testimony by tree experts), and the City's contention that the approval decision can't be appealed. 

Now, a reasonable person would think that both the City of Salem and US Bank want to be sure that the cutting of five beautiful trees on a public right of way was done legally. I'm a reasonable person. And that's what I think.

My attorney's letter contains that sentiment. Mr. Malone says:

Lastly, Mr. Fernandez and Mr. Allbritton, I appeal to your spirit of community in requesting that you engage Mr. Hines in negotiations to determine if the three of you can reach an agreement that satisfies both your concerns and Mr. Hines’ concerns regarding the remaining Japanese Zelkova trees. 

Soon after my wife and I moved to rural south Salem's Spring Lake Estates development, I said "OK" to being the neighborhood association's secretary. Twenty-some years later, I'm still writing and sending out minutes, along with keeping track of the groups bylaws/rules.

Once in a while I hear from someone who is concerned about something the board of directors has done. They ask me to check if that is allowed by our bylaws/rules. If there indeed is a problem, our board looks into it right away.

They, and I, feel that we're "public servants" of the ninety-six property owners here in Spring Lake Estates. Of course, we're volunteer public servants.

That's why I asked my attorney to use the phrase "spirit of community" in the letter that went to the City of Salem and US Bank. We have that out here in my neighborhood.

I hope very much that it is also alive at the Salem City Hall, even though many people I talk to tell me, "the City doesn't care what the public thinks; they just do whatever they want to, which usually is what the Chamber of Commerce wants."

Well, I'm an optimist.

Partly because I've experienced how people in a community can work together respectfully, productively, and openly, while disagreeing about all kinds of stuff. I'm a vegetarian progressive wine-sipping electric-car driving guy. I get along great with carnivorous conservative beer-drinking pickup-driving neighbors. 

We argue about politics, diet, the environment, whatever. In a friendly way.

At neighborhood board meetings we're all focused on doing what's best for Spring Lake Estates. Anybody who has a concern about what the board is doing gets the full attention of me, other officers, and board members.

And like I said, we're unpaid "public servants." So I feel justified in expecting the same of taxpayer-paid public servants, such as City of Salem staff. Their job is to treat everybody equally, just as we do out here in our own little quasi-government of Spring Lake Estates Recreation Properties, Inc.

However, I'm also a realist. I know that the rich and powerful have much better access to government officials than the poor and powerless.

Watching a City Council hearing tonight on CCTV about the controversial Third Bridge proposal, I heard a number of opponents of the bridge complain that council members and city staff have shamefully stifled public input. I didn't hear one proponent make a similar complaint.

I bet it's rare, maybe never, that Republican'ish corporate'ish types gripe that Salem city government ignores their views and shuts them out of decision-making processes. 

Thus I feel like I'm going to learn a lot from filing my appeal of the US Bank tree removal decision, which includes an effort to save the remaining two trees. I've had a lot of dealings with Marion County officials; hardly any with City of Salem staff.

My optimistic side expects that City staff will do everything possible to make sure that both the process followed in the US Bank tree removal application, and the outcome of Peter Fernandez' approval decision, were legally sound. 

Meaning, city ordinances were followed correctly. And facts "on the ground" (literally) supported killing the trees, rather than pruning or thinning them. Or doing nothing with them. 

I also expect that US Bank will hold off on cutting down the remaining two trees until my appeal is dealt with. US Bank has a corporate code of ethics. It says nice things about environmental stewardship, being a responsible member of the community, and such.

Waiting to make sure that a corporate action is legal strikes me as something US Bank would want its employees to do. Even so, whenever I drive through downtown I glance down State Street to reassure myself that the two Japanese Zelkova trees are still standing.

As unlikely as this is, if they get cut down before my appeal runs its course, then...

I want to be positive on Earth Day. I'm not going to share the thoughts that could come after that ellipsis. I'm hopeful that staff at the City of Salem and US Bank share the sense of respectful community involvement that we have out here in my neighborhood. 

We shall see. We shall see.

Attorney affirms: City of Salem screwed up on US Bank tree cutting

I've gotten some lawyerly confirmation of what I said in the "Looks like US Bank trees were cut illegally" post written three days ago.

Not being an attorney, I asked Sean Malone, who is, to offer an opinion about whether opponents of the tree removal application submitted by US Bank and approved by the City of Salem had the right to appeal the decision -- which City staff have been telling me isn't allowed by Ordinance Chapter 86, "Trees and Shrubs."

After reviewing the ordinance, my analysis of the issue, and emails I'd gotten from City staff laying out their view of Chapter 86's Appeal section (86.160), Sean, who specializes in environmental law, concluded that affected persons, which includes those who testified in opposition to the US Bank application, did indeed have a right to appeal. 

Here's his letter, received yesterday, which I've sent to a bunch of city officials: councilors, public works director, city manager, mayor, urban forester, and a few others.
Download Memo to Hines re State Street Trees 4.19.2013 FINAL

I'm being really open with this issue because what has happened, and will happen, to those State Street trees is the business of everybody who cares about downtown Salem. Unfortunately, the City of Salem has a habit of doing the people's business out of view of the people.

Since I'm objecting to how the City has handled the tree-cutting, I want to behave otherwise. Plus, I'm a blogger. Ready, willing, and able to share what's happening in my life -- especially when it involves civic issues that should be as transparent as possible to public view.

Sadly, an appeal won't bring back the three beautiful trees killed for no good reason by US Bank, with the permission of the City of Salem. I walked by the scene of the crime this afternoon. Someone has placed memorial flowers on each sorrowful stump.

But I'm going to do all I can to make sure the remaining two trees are saved. Here's a photo I took today of the wonderful tree on the corner of State and Commercial.

It boggles my mind that US Bank executives and City of Salem officials don't think, "this tree deserves to keep on living." I've watched this tree become more and more beautiful during the thirty-seven years I've lived here. It's become a friend of mine. (If that sentence sounds stupid to you, you aren't a real tree lover.)

Walking down the sidewalk a bit, I was pleased to see that the other remaining tree (three have been cut down by US Bank; two remain) is leafing out nicely. It's been behind its sister to the west. Nice to know that the tree is just a late-leafer.

For a while, and I intend to work as hard as I can to make that a long while, the remaining trees are almost certainly safe from being cut down. (US Bank was required to hold off on cutting the last two because migrating birds were in the trees; thank you birds!)

I've notified the City of Salem that based on my attorney's opinion letter, I am appealing the City of Salem's failure to allow opponents of the US Bank tree-cutting application an opportunity to appeal. It would be unethical, and I believe illegal, for the trees to be cut down now that the City knows a legal challenge is being made to its interpretation of Chapter 86.

As Sean noted at the end of his letter, the affected persons who didn't get a chance to appeal the tree removal decision could challenge in Marion County Circuit Court the City's apparent failure to abide by its own ordinance.

Carole Smith, one of the opponents who wasn't able to file an appeal, has been helping me. Her comment on one of my blog posts about the tree cutting clued me in to the fact that those who testified at meetings of the Shade Tree Advisory Committee weren't notified of the City's decision until the day that marked the deadline for appealing.

City staff have told me that an application to remove five large, gorgeous trees in Salem's Historic District is just like an electrical permit application -- which can't be appealed by anyone other than the applicant. I've told them, "That's ridiculous." 

Leaving aside the fact that, in my attorney's opinion, the City ordinance clearly gives affected persons the right to appeal, there are big differences between a permit to do private electrical work and a permit to cut down beautiful trees on a public right of way/sidewalk in downtown Salem.

Every person who works in, lives in, or visits downtown Salem is affected by the attractiveness, livability/workability, and overall ambience of the Historic Area. Public streets are the public's business. It's absurd to argue that only US Bank is entitled to appeal a decision on its application (meaning, only a "no" decision can be appealed, not a "yes" to cut down the trees, as the City is claiming).

Well, it's now up to the City of Salem to decide where we go from here. Carole Smith and I, along with other opponents of the seemingly illegal tree-cutting, hope that the City will acknowledge that opponents had a right to appeal.

An apology, plus issuance of a revised order that requires the remaining two trees to be preserved, needs to happen. Then everyone involved can sit down and figure out how to prevent this sort of tree-cutting debacle from ever happening again. Otherwise, it's off to Circuit Court we go.

Chapter 86 needs some work. It only addresses planting trees in the Historic District, not removing them. This relates to one reason I'm confident that opponents would have won an appeal; neither US Bank nor the City ever provided a believable justification for removing the trees. 

Any problems with the five trees could have been handled by judicious pruning. So I've submitted an application to the City of Salem, asking that the two remaining trees be pruned to the extent necessary to have them conform with Historic District norms.
Download Pruning Permit Application
Download Addendum to pruning application 

I look forward to discussing my application with the Shade Tree Advisory Committee. I'll tell them that I wanted to address the question of pruning now that chances for saving the last two trees have improved, given my attorney's conclusion that opponents have a right to appeal. 

If there are any problems with those two beautiful trees, let's do whatever pruning is deemed necessary by licensed foresters and other tree experts. This, of course, is what should have been done in the first place by US Bank and the City of Salem.

Three stumps on State Street are three too many. Preventing any more unnecessary tree-killing is part of my new Retired To-Do List. Hopefully key staff at the City of Salem will realize this also should be their goal.

Does anyone really believe that downtown Salem would be better off with only buildings and cars in this picture? (along with a few small barely visible trees on the other side of State Street)

Looks like US Bank trees were cut illegally

Last night I blogged about how surprised I was that nobody appealed the screwy decision by the City of Salem to allow five beautiful mature downtown trees to be removed after US Bank asked for permission to kill them.

I've learned a likely reason: opponents of the tree-cutting weren't notified of the City's decision to approve to tree removal until April 5. And when did the document they got say the deadline for an appeal to be filed was?

April 5.

It looks to me like the City of Salem screwed up. Big time. 

If timely notice, which I believe is 15 days, wasn't given to affected parties of their opportunity to appeal the approval decision, it's fair to say that the trees were cut down illegally.

Three trees have been killed so far. The other two await their death once migrating birds depart. I've sent several "Urgent!" emails to the Salem Mayor and City Manager offices, along with other city staff.

I told them that it'd be a shame, to put it mildly, if the last two trees were also cut down before a proper legal appeal could take place. Of course, the best move would be for the City to amend its decision, ordering the remaining trees to stay.

Or US Bank could do the right thing and agree to leave those two trees alone.

Since US Bank has never come up with a good reason for why they want the trees to be removed, they should replace the three trees they've killed, and let the others rest in peace... alive.

When I learn more from the City, I'll share more. 

[Update: here's a PDF file of the letter that was received by an opponent of the tree-cutting on April 5 at 3:30 pm. I've blacked out the name of the person.]
Download Removal of State Street Trees (no name) 

Five reasons I'm irked by City of Salem's US Bank tree-cutting decision

After reading more closely the City of Salem document dated March 12, 2013, non-pithily titled "Background, Findings and Decision regarding the removal of the State Street Trees (302 State Street S: Ladd and Bush Building -- US Bank)," my initial opinion expressed yesterday hasn't changed:

My wife and I are long-time land use activists.

We've been involved in quite a few land use decisions at the Marion County level. We're familiar with ordinances, findings of fact, hearing officers, and, yes, how public officials are swayed by "political" considerations -- using that word in a broad sense.

After a first reading of the decision, I'm struck by how insubstantial the concluding Basis of Decision section is. Worse that I expected, after reading newspaper stories about the tree cutting. 

Like I said, this document screams at me, we've got to find a way to justify doing what US Bank wants, even though tree experts and the city Shade Tree Committee have concluded that the trees should remain.

Another Statesman Journal story about the removal of five beautiful mature Japanese Zelkova trees ran in the paper today. Reporter Michael Rose included some nice quotes that echo how I see this fiasco. One is from me. I'll boldface the echo'y stuff.

An act of civil disobedience has Salem residents talking about the value of iconic street trees versus the demands of a downtown business.

David Rosales, the owner of La Capitale and Bar and Andaluz, was arrested Friday by Salem Police. He faces charges of trespassing, disorderly conduct and criminal mischief after a confrontation with U.S. Bank employees over the removal of trees outside of the bank’s historic Ladd and Bush branch at 302 State St.

“I would like to see people pay more attention to our town and the beauty here,” Rosales said Monday. The restaurant owner said he was “sick of the old way” decisions have been made in the city where he grew up.

...Rosales quickly found supporters on social media. Brian Hines wrote on his blog: “Way to go U.S. Bank. Horrible, PR, marketing decision.”

Claudia Howells, another Salem resident who wanted the trees spared, said the situation is frustrating. The city’s shade tree committee had made a recommendation against removing the trees.

“You go through the appropriate process and it doesn’t make any difference,” Howells said.

Salem resident Mark Wigg said the trees were sacrificed without a good explanation.

“I haven’t heard a straight line from these people yet,” Wigg said of his discussions with U.S. Bank.

Download Protest_of_removal_of_trees_sparks_debate

My feelings exactly. Read the City of Salem decision yourself. See if you agree with the top five reasons I'm irked by it. Here's the PDF file.
Download US Bank State Street Trees decision 

(1) No one appealed the decision to cut down the trees.

This is perplexing. I'm trying to figure out why, given the number of people who urged the Shade Tree Advisory Committee to save the trees. One of these people left a comment on an earlier post saying that the decision was received on April 5, the day the appeal period expired. 

This needs some explaining. Tonight I wrote Public Works staff, asking for a list of those who got the March 12 decision, when it was sent to them, and how it was sent (mail, email). If opponents didn't get timely notice of the approval decision, this could explain why no appeal was filed. However, if the opponents failed to appeal for some other reason, I'm irked at them also. 

Why? Because it seems to me this decision could have been overturned by a hearings officer on appeal. Which gets me to my next four Irked Reasons.

(2) "Good Old Boy" network is (disturbingly) alive and well in Salem city government.

Kudos to whoever wrote the decision for being so open about the mutual admiration thing going on between the Director of Public Works and Ryan Albritton, US Bank Region President. Check out p. 3, para 2. 

Albritton "verbally appealed" after the second meeting of the Shade Tree Advisory Committee. Interesting. In my experience with land use appeals, usually some sort of formal written appeal is required. But at the City of Salem, I guess a US Bank President can just walk in and have a chat with the Public Works Director if he doesn't like how things are going with his pet project of killing five trees along a public sidewalk.

What was Allbritton disturbed about? Amazingly, a "lack of proper representation at the Advisory Committee meeting." In other words, US Bank apparently didn't send anyone to the meeting, because Albritton figured the city's decision was wired in his favor. And why did he think that? Because Public Works staff had been supportive of removing the trees several years prior, and Allbritton thought a decision in his favor would be "pro forma."

Really disturbing. At least to people like me, who believe that government officials should treat everybody alike when it comes to enforcing laws, ordinances, regulations, and such. (Yeah, that isn't how things work in the Real World, but I'm in favor of a Better Unreal World.)

The document states that the Director of Public Works did some personal recollecting, and by golly, he did remember some prior discussions about the "promised" removal of the trees. I'm not sure why "promised" was put in quotation marks. Maybe it is related to footnote 3, which says "The record indicates, however, that the Urban Forester did not recommend removing the State Street trees in either hearing before the Shade Tree Advisory Committee."

So the Director of Public Works had promised the President of US Bank that the trees could be cut down. However, a few inconvenient truths stood between that promise and it being fulfilled. Which gets us to my next Irk.

(3) City of Salem tree experts recommended saving the trees. 

Three times. That was how many times the Shade Tree Advisory Committee said "no cut," along with the Urban Forester. It was three times, rather than two, because Allbritton's "verbal appeal" and his reminding the Director of Public Works about a prior promise to have the trees cut down led to another Shade Tree Advisory Committee meeting on January 9, 2013. 

Result was the same.

Committee said "no cut." So now, even with the proper representation the US Bank president had decided to forego at the previous meeting, the committee had once, twice, and thrice denied the bank's request to remove all of the trees. Usually three strikes means you're out. But not if you're a US Bank president who had gotten a promise from the Director of Public Works that the trees would, somehow or other, be removed.

(Note: recently I talked with a homeowner in Salem whose sidewalk is truly being buckled by tree roots -- something that isn't happening at all at US Bank, though bank officials are wrongly claiming that the sidewalk is unsafe to walk on because of tree root damage. The homeowner said she asked the City for permission to cut down the tree. Her request was denied, even though she had a good reason. Guess you need to be the incoming president of the Chamber of Commerce, which Allbritton is, to get good service from the City of Salem.)

(4) US Bank isn't telling the truth about its liability concerns.

My wife called US Bank the day the first story ran about State Street trees being cut down. She was told by a bank manager that the main reason the trees needed to be removed was liability concerns: the sidewalk was, or would be, dangerous to walk on, especially for the bank's elderly customers.

Well, read page 5, para 3. The decision says that tree-caused damage to the sidewalk and curbs around the US Bank building had been repaired by the City. And it is the City's responsibility to repair damage to sidewalks caused by street trees. Not stated was an additional fact: the urban forester had said that the tree roots could be cut to minimize future damage. 

Conclusion by the City of Salem: "As such, the liability argument by the tree removal proponents is not pertinent to the tree removal decision." Not pertinent. Yet this is the PR spin US Bank staff keep blabbing out when people ask, why are you cutting down those beautiful trees? Great question. Which still hasn't been answered. Certainly not in the decision that supposedly justifies the City's approval of the tree removal.

This gets me to my last Irk. Might as well throw in some well-deserved profanity.

(5) The City of Salem's "Basis of Decision" (p. 6) is complete bullshit.

I'm not a lawyer, but I've been involved with quite a few land use appeals and have worked closely with some of the best land use attorneys in Oregon. I've read lots of land use case law. I have a pretty good feel for what is a defensible land use decision, and what isn't. 

I could be wrong (an ever-present possibility), but here's the reasons I consider the City's decision to allow the State Street trees to be killed to be highly legally dubious. Sure wish an appeal had been filed. Let's look at the four reasons the City gave for removing the trees:

1. The trees have grown well beyond their design size and obscure the sight lines to a historic building. In my reading of the City tree ordinance, I only found reference to "planting" trees in the historic district, not removing them. Trees grow. The city's urban forester said they could be pruned to restore sight lines of the bank building. Or every other tree could be removed, not all of them. 

2. The tree branches of the existing trees are not of an open nature as required by code. Are you kidding me? The code, as quoted just a few lines above, says "only trees of a columnar or open limb structure... may be planted." Astoundingly, the opinion goes on to say "While the existing zelkova trees are columnar in nature, they are not of an open limb structure thus further limiting the sight lines to the building." Wow! Read that "or"!!! Columnar OR open limb structure. Code doesn't require an open limb structure. And pruning can create a more open structure.

3. The tree branches are closer to a historic building than is allowed by code. Again, the code speaks of trees not being planted too close to a historic building. After being planted, trees grow. If they grow too close to a building, you freaking prune them! There is no finding which states the trees can't be pruned. In fact, the urban forester said they could. 

4. At least one of the trees may be impacting the adjacent stormwater system. Oh, wow. One...may be... So cut down every one of the trees because one...may be... Ridiculous. Infuriating. If dropping leaves are the problem, you could have called me. I'm 64; I'm not a multi-billion dollar company like US Bank; but I know how to rake and pick up leaves. I, along with many others, I'm sure, would have been happy to keep leaves out of the drain. And if roots were the problem, the urban forester said they could be trimmed.

Bottom line: this was a terrible decision by the City of Salem. Indefensible, really. Which makes it more distrubing that none of the opponents appealed the decision. As noted above, I want to learn why.

What seems clear, though, is that the City of Salem was desperate to approve the killing of the trees, and city officials had promised this to U.S. Bank before an application to remove the State Street trees had even been submitted. 

This isn't the way city government is supposed to work. But from what I hear, all too often it does. This time, five innocent trees got caught in the crossfire. Three are dead and gone. I sure hope some way can be found to save the last two.

Read flawed decision by Salem officials to remove US Bank trees

Today I received a PDF file of the City of Salem Public Works decision that allowed US Bank to cut down five large beautiful Japanese Zelkova trees that have graced State Street in downtown.

Download US Bank State Street Trees decision

I'll have more to say about the report in tomorrow's blog post.

Read it yourself, and I think you'll agree with me that this seems like a pre-determined "kill the trees" decision in desperate search of flimsy facts/ordinance interpretations to justify it.

My wife and I are long-time land use activists.

We've been involved in quite a few land use decisions at the Marion County level. We're familiar with ordinances, findings of fact, hearing officers, and, yes, how public officials are swayed by "political" considerations -- using that word in a broad sense.

After a first reading of the decision, I'm struck by how insubstantial the concluding Basis of Decision section is. Worse that I expected, after reading newspaper stories about the tree cutting. 

Like I said, this document screams at me, we've got to find a way to justify doing what US Bank wants, even though tree experts and the city Shade Tree Committee have concluded that the trees should remain.

Anyway, more thoughts will follow tomorrow. 

More about how US Bank needlessly killed five downtown Salem trees

Losing five large beautiful trees in downtown Salem is bad enough. How this travesty occurred is equally disturbing. The full story remains to be fleshed leafed out. 

(The chapters so far are described in previous blog posts, here, here, and here.)

Still, during the past week I've gotten a pretty good feel for how the needless tree-killing came about. One of my reputable sources is my wife, who spoke with a US Bank manager about why the bank wanted the trees to be removed.

She didn't get the name of the manager, who was a man. What we do know, though, is that the reasons this person gave don't jibe with what I've learned from other sources.

My wife, Laurel, was told that a primary reason for killing the trees was that the roots were buckling the State Street sidewalk in front of the bank, making it difficult for customers (especially elderly ones) to navigate the sidewalk. The manager also claimed that this problem couldn't be resolved with the city.

Pretty clearly, this isn't true. The sidewalk is in good shape. I walked along it a few days ago. City officials didn't want the trees removed. So what is the real reason US Bank wanted the trees cut down? 

Well, only US Bank knows for sure. Convenience is one likely theory. The bank didn't like the messiness of leaves falling in autumn. Which, of course, is what the leaves of deciduous trees do in the fall. Fall. 

Regardless, here's the most important apparent fact that hasn't been stressed, or even pointed out, really, in Statesman Journal stories about the tree-cutting:

The City of Salem didn't want to cut down the trees.

Only US Bank did. Along with the Salem Chamber of Commerce. Not surprising, since the regional president of US Bank, Ryan Allbritton, is president-elect of the Chamber.

(Allbritton's office reportedly is on the top floor of the downtown US Bank branch. The trees probably obscured the view from his window(s). Whether this is another reason for killing the trees is speculation.)

As noted in what seems to be an accurate rendition of events, the city's Shade Tree Committee repeatedly denied the US Bank request to cut down the five State Street trees. The city's urban forester affirmed that the trees were not diseased and were not pushing up the sidewalk.

My understanding is that neither the city's Director of Public Works nor the City Manager felt that the trees should be removed. So how is it that five ugly stumps rather than five mature beautiful trees are soon going to un-grace the street in front of the downtown US Bank branch?

Because US Bank, and its Chamber of Commerce "posse," pressured the City to do what it didn't want to do, but legally felt it was required to do: allow the trees to be killed.

Why? Because a seeming loophole in the shade tree ordinance allows trees in the Historic District to be removed if they obscure historically significant buildings.

(I need to learn more about this; haven't yet gotten a copy of the City's letter where the reasoning for allowing the tree-killing is stated.)

So even though US Bank's actions are against the city's shade tree ordinance, and there was no safety reason for removing the trees, Albritton and US Bank got their way because the City of Salem felt (probably correctly) that it wouldn't win a legal battle if the bank appealed a decision that forbade the tree killing.

What irks my wife and me about this is that she doesn't recall the US Bank manager she talked with saying anything about the trees needing to be killed because they obscured some architectural details of the building.

Thus US Bank found a legal reason to get its way that seemingly had nothing to do with the real reason(s) Albritton and company wanted the trees killed. Which still remains a semi-mystery. 

Yes, this is the way big business often gets its way: out-lawyer, out-spend, and out-lobby the "little guys" (remember the 99%?). This happens at all levels of governmental decision-making, local, state, federal. However, most reasonable people would agree that this isn't the way things should be.

From what I've heard, small businesses in the State Street area didn't want the trees killed. Having talked with quite a few other people during the past week, I can say that I haven't found anyone who applauds the removal of those five trees.

Yet it was done. For no good reason.

I deeply doubt that executives at US Bank were lying awake at night, visions of architectural details on the venerable downtown branch being obscured by tree branches and leaves running through their heads. This, though, apparently is the legal reason all of the trees soon will be dead and gone.

The Salem tree ordinance needs to be fixed so this debacle never happens again.

[Update: after reading a comment that said the ordinance only refers to "planting" trees in the Historic District, I'm less sure about this. The commenter seems to be correct. The pertinent section, 86.130, says: 

(c) In addition to the above regulations, the following guidelines shall apply to the planting of trees in the Salem Downtown Historic District and the Central Business District:

(1) Trees shall not be planted in a location which would obscure significant architectural features.

So now I wonder whether the City should have gone ahead and let US Bank appeal a "no cut" decision. A hearings officer might have upheld that decision. We'll never know now. Anyway, as noted below the City needs to refine the ordinance to make clear that if a planted tree does obscure significant architectural features, the solution is to prune the tree -- not kill it.]

There needs to be a much better process for determining the proper balance between the value of large shade trees in the downtown Historic District and the value of being able to see the structural details of historic buildings.

Have you ever heard of this word, "pruning," Mr. Albritton and other US Bank executives?

My wife and I do it all the time on large trees on our property. We don't kill them. We prune them. And I happily deal with all the leaves they drop in the fall, even though I'm one 64 year old person and don't have the resources of a multi-billion dollar corporation behind me.

I'll end with a final worry: as noted above, Ryan Allbritton of US Bank is the president-elect of the Salem Chamber of Commerce.

From what I've learned about this tree-killing episode, Allbritton displayed a poor leadership and managerial style in dealing with the City of Salem and downtown businesses/people opposed to removing the trees. Collaborating, communicating, negotiating, compromising -- these took a back seat to political power-plays.

Again... yeah, all too often this is how big corporations and the Salem Chamber of Commerce like to play their games. It's just disturbing if we see more-of-the-same during Allbritton's reign as Chamber president.

Here's a suggestion for Mr. Allbritton: the final two trees haven't been cut down yet because birds are nesting in them. Let them stay. Plant some large replacement trees in the areas occupied by the three trees you've already cut down. Issue a public statement apologizing for any ill will and bad feelings caused by the bank's actions.

Then head to La Capitale and buy a dinner prepared by David Rosales, who was arrested because he angrily protested the killing of the State Street trees. Shake hands with David and say, "let's start over, my friend."

Now, that would be almost as beautiful as the two trees I hope you will save.

How U.S. Bank got to cut down five beautiful downtown Salem trees

Today I got an excellent comment on my blog post, "U.S. Bank kills large downtown trees. Don't bank with them." 

It's the best explanation that I've seen so far about how this (one of five trees that has been, or will be, needlessly cut down by U.S. Bank)...

Became this...

The story of how this happened is disturbing. I'll talk more about what this sorry tale says about Salem politics and Chamber of Commerce influence-peddling in a following post. 

Here's the comment from Cherry City Blogger, with a few misspellings, typos, and links cleaned up for easier reading. If you care about downtown Salem, read on. And seriously consider taking the actions suggested at the end of the comment.

The City requested the State Street trees be removed in 2010 as part of the road/sidewalk repaving. The City's Urban Forester reported to the Shade Tree Committee the roots could be trimmed and the trees would not need removal.The Shade Tree Committee denied the City's request for removal.

In July 2012, US Bank requested permission to remove the 5 State Street Trees. Again the Shade Tree Committee denied their request. In Jan 2013, US Bank again requested the 5 State Street trees be removed. The Shade Tree Committee asked for public input.

Several people testified, 5 emails were entered into testimony, along with a petition signed by 22 downtown employees and business owners, and the CAN-DO Neighborhood Association -- asking for the trees to remain. The Shade Tree Committee, again, denied US Bank's request.

US Bank "verbally appealed" the decision to the City's Director of Public Works. A decision was finalized on March 13, which went into effect on March 19th, and a cutting permit was issued. US Bank is paying the full cost of removing the trees, stumps and planting replacement trees. The City did not contact the people, who testified at the last Shade Tree Committee, that the decision had been overturned until Friday, April 5.

Before you blame all businesses in Salem (for getting what they want at the expense of citizens), please focus in. The businesses getting what they want are the business elite in the Salem Chamber of Commerce. Yes, Ryan Allbritton is incoming President of the Salem Chamber.

Just as important, where are our city councilors? They are elected to represent us -- the citizens. They were contacted and chose to take no action. Several of our City Councilors were voted into their council seats by public support of the Chamber Board and by the voting membership of the Salem Chamber of Commerce. The other councilors know, to keep their seats, they need to play along with the Chamber.

This is very bad for Salem as a community. It is time to take a stand. Remove your money from US Bank and ask US Bank to transfer Ryan Allbritten to another branch - give us a bank manager with a better moral compass - and greater allegiance to US Bank's Code of Ethics, it's customers and our community.

WHAT YOU CAN DO: To place a complaint about Ryan Allbritton's violations of US Banks Ethics, visit https://www2.usbank.com/cgi_w2/cfm/about/ethics/ethics_feedback.cfm Be sure to read the "Code of Ethics & Business Conduct" so you can quote the ethics violations Mr. Allbritton has committed.

If you want to contact your city council, they can all be reached at this email address: CityCouncil@CityofSalem.net Please request the City Council re-write SRC 86 (Trees and Shubs Ordinance) so this will never happen again!

U.S. Bank kills large downtown trees. Don't bank with them.

Yesterday the U.S. Bank tree killing spree began in Salem, Oregon. Three of five large Japanese Zelkovas, which have beautified downtown Salem for about fifty years, were cut down for no good reason.

The other two trees are on the chopping block. Innocents, their only crime being that some U.S. Bank executive didn't like them, they await their turn to be changed from this...

To this...

I was disturbed about this two days ago when I wrote "Downtown trees destroyed: shame on U.S. Bank and City of Salem." That was before the trees were cut down.

Today I visited the scene of the crime and took some photos. Now I'm outraged. 

As was David Rosales, owner and chef of one of Salem's best restaurants, La Capitale. He was arrested today for doing what I wanted to do when I saw the stumps and sawdust: go into U.S. Bank and yell at the employees, hoping that management would take notice.

I didn't have the guts. David did. I applaud him. Free David Rosales!

A downtown Salem business owner was arrested Friday after he reportedly screamed at U.S. Bank employees about the removal of downtown trees.

David Rosales, the owner of La Capitale and Bar and Andaluz, entered the Ladd and Bush branch at 302 State St. around 2:30 p.m., Salem Police Lt. Dave Okada said.

Employees told police that Rosales started screaming about the three Japanese Zelkovas the bank cut down on Thursday evening.

Here's what is deeply irritating about this whole thing: the city's Shade Tree Advisory Committee advised against removing the trees, and the city's Urban Forester said that the trees' roots could be pruned to avoid further damage to the sidewalk.

A few days ago my wife talked with a U.S. Bank manager who told her that the main reason the trees were going to be cut down was liability concerns. The sidewalk was dangerous for their elderly customers to navigate.

That, to put it bluntly, is bullshit.

I don't know why U.S. Bank wanted to cut down these beautiful trees, but it sure seems like tree roots weren't the reason. Again, the city's Shade Tree Advisory Committee said, "leave them." 

Someone in city government overruled the tree experts. Hmmmm... wonder why? 

Oh, could it be that the President-Elect of the Salem Chamber of Commerce happens to be Ryan Allbritton of U.S. Bank? The Statesman Journal tells us in a profile that he is the regional president, and would love to have lunch with... George W. Bush or John Maxwell (an evangelical Christian pastor/author).

Sure, I could be jumping to conclusions. I don't know Mr. Albritton.

But I strongly suspect that he was instrumental in approving the killing of these trees. And I also strongly suspect that given who he'd like to have lunch with, Mr. Albritton is not an avid environmentalist, nature worshipper, or devotee of the Gaia hypothesis. 

Which is fine. Each to his own.

However, cutting down beautiful mature trees that grace a public street in downtown Salem for no good reason gets us out of "each to his own" territory. 

The City of Salem has some explaining to do. I look forward to the City Manager telling us the details of how U.S. Bank's request to kill the trees was approved. From what I saw today, it sure wasn't because the sidewalk was being destroyed by roots.

Being 64, I guess I'm one of those old people the U.S. Bank manager my wife talked to was concerned about. From what he said, I figured that the sidewalk must be buckled, cracked, dangerous for us Social Security recipients to traverse.

The photo above shows the biggest crack I could find. Stepping on it, I neither felt my mother's back break, nor, in fact, felt the crack itself through my minimalist Teva soles. There are way larger cracks than this on many sidewalks and park walking trails in Salem. 

So we're left with No Good Reason for the reason these trees are being cut down. Which is why Rosales engaged in his act of angry civil disobedience, and others left these messages beneath the remaining trees. 

I couldn't make out all of the spray-painted words. But "no" leapt out at me. Seeing the stumps and the sawdust got me emotional, just as Rosales and other tree-killing protesters are. Looking up at the tree, which doesn't have long to live, almost made me cry.

I grew up in the foothills of the Sierra Nevada Mountains, surrounded by majestic large oaks. Where my wife and I live now, in rural south Salem, I'm still surrounded by large oaks and other trees, some over 200 years old. We've planted many more on our property, well over a hundred.

I know the nature of beautiful, leafy, large trees: they're sometimes a pain, but always a greater pleasure.

I spend several weeks in the fall cursing the leaves that drop in ghastly profusion here, there, and everywhere, seemingly laser-guided by the Oak Tree Spirits to fall in places around our non-easy-care yard where they are most difficult to pick up.

But you know, U.S. Bank, I'm freaking 64 years old and I manage to cope with the comparatively minor headaches of the large trees on our property. I'm pretty sure a multi-billion dollar corporation could have found a way to do the same.

So I've got no sympathy for U.S. Bank.

From now on it will be known to me as Tree Killing Bank. I vow to never do business with this financial institution. It has demonstrated its disregard for local folks. U.S. Bank makes lots of money from Salem area residents, but pretty clearly it doesn't care about us.

Wherever you live, if you read this "blog post in a bottle" that I'm sending out into the currents of cyberspace, hoping it reaches some tree-loving customers of U.S. Bank, I urge you to strongly consider switching your account to another bank or credit union, preferably a local one.

U.S. Bank doesn't care.

It doesn't care about trees, and given the recent behavior of huge financial institutions I'm confident it doesn't care about other living beings which don't generate large profits for it. 

For no good reason, U.S. Bank eagerly killed five trees in downtown Salem. You can send U.S. Bank a message by eagerly killing your account with them.

Downtown trees destroyed: shame on U.S. Bank and City of Salem

Who doesn't love trees?

Well, yesterday and today the Statesman Journal ran stories about two Salem entities which don't: U.S. Bank and the City of Salem.

(photo by me and my iPhone; taken this afternoon while trees are still standing)

Tuesday some tree lovers protested the decision to allow U.S. Bank to remove five beautiful trees that grace the street in front of the downtown Ladd and Bush branch.

A city decision to permit the removal of five Japanese Zelkova trees on the north side of the Ladd and Bush branch of U.S. Bank prompted protest Tuesday at Commercial and State streets.

For Salem resident Mark Wigg, the trees are part of what makes downtown Salem unique.

“It’s such an iconic image of what Salem is,” Wigg said. “This is one of the most beautiful parts of Salem. They’re trying to destroy the thing we advertise as what makes Salem beautiful.”

The Shade Tree Advisory Committee, a subcommittee of the Salem Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, heard the bank’s request for the permit on Jan. 9. The shade tree committee recommended that the trees not be removed.

But that recommendation was overturned by someone. I don't know who. Probably doesn't matter. In Salem, money and the Chamber of Commerce usually get their way. What big business wants, big business gets.

What this leads to in downtown (and elsewhere) is what's been called the "tragedy of the commons." This happens when everybody does their own thing, like grazing lots of sheep on a grassy common area belonging to everyone.

Result: overgrazing ruins the commons for everyone.

In Salem's case, downtown businesses want to do what they think is best for their bottom line. City officials give them a lot of leeway. 

So we end up with atrocities like the ugly Ross Dress for Less sign that graces (not!) one of the main entrances to downtown Salem. And the cutting down of this wonderful tree that I, and countless others, enjoy looking at every time I drive by the downtown U.S. Bank branch.

The end result is that the "commons," downtown Salem, becomes less attractive to residents and visitors. If people want a tasteless, bland, concrete and asphalt-filled shopping area, convenient outlying malls with unlimited free parking beckon. 

With fewer people coming to a un-beckoning downtown, the businesses that helped make it unattractive wonder "where are all the customers?"

They don't realize that each of their seemingly insignificant uglifying actions -- a big white sign here, a gorgeous tree cut down there -- add up to the aforementioned tragedy of the commons. A downtown that belongs to every business ends up being wrecked by the semi-well-intentioned actions of many (not all) businesses.

I said "semi-well-intentioned." 

This morning my wife phoned the downtown U.S. Bank branch. She complained about the trees being cut down. An employee offered to have someone call her back with an explanation. To the bank's credit, a manager did return her call fairly soon.

He said that the trees needed to be removed for liability reasons. Roots were causing the sidewalk to become uneven. The bank has elderly customers who could trip and fall. This seemed to be the main reason. Other reasons are offered up by a city official in today's newspaper story.

To which I reply: if these trees truly were valued by U.S. Bank and the City of Salem, they'd find a way to preserve them. 

Salem's tree lovers would help. U.S. Bank should have asked its customers, along with other people who frequent downtown businesses, whether they'd rather have a perfectly smooth sidewalk or those beautiful trees.

These trees could have been used to bring Salem residents together, rather than split them apart.

As it stands, I and many others now look upon U.S. Bank more negatively than we did before. Giant banks don't have a great reputation for caring about local concerns; this tree-killing episode reinforces that point of view.

U.S. Bank could have reached out with a "how do we save the trees?" campaign. Maybe creative changes could have been made to the sidewalk; maybe artistic signs could have warned of tree root bumps ahead. 

We could have ended up with a quirkier, more vibrant, interesting, and, yes, stranger Salem (a favorite subject of mine). Now, it looks like we're going to get five fewer large trees in downtown.

Hopefully people will remember who was responsible for this.

(When I took the photo I didn't notice that the crossing signal had changed to a "stop" symbol; appropriate; too bad U.S. Bank won't take this message to heart.)

Salem's Minto Island Pedestrian Bridge/Trail looks like a winner

I'm a frequent critic of the town I've lived in or near for 36 years, Salem. Us cynical old-timers like to call it, So-Lame.

Compared to Portland, Corvallis, Eugene, Ashland, Bend, and other Oregon cities with a lot more creativity, energy, coolness, and vision.

But yesterday I attended a meeting of the Salem City Club where speakers brought us up to date on the status of the long-planned bridge from the downtown Salem riverfront to Minto Brown Island.

Annie Gorski, project manager for the City of Salem, showed slides of what the bridge will look like. Way cool! Something I don't often say about Salem. She hopes the bridge will be lighted with the seasons. Me too. 

It was great to hear Salem city manager Linda Norris say that the mayor and city council want the pedestrian bridge to be an eye-opening WOW! vision for residents and visitors.

During the Q & A part of the meeting luncheon meeting a man criticized the bridge's expense and design, arguing that it would be better to have a rustic-looking no-frills wood plank bridge cross the Willamette slough.

Bad idea. Why not have something beautiful rather than plain?

A bridge that draws people to the riverfront from afar with those arches, which Gorski said is a unique design. They look like twin moutain peaks to me. Well, also like nicely shaped breasts. Either way, the arches are appealing.

Along with the lengthy new trail (near center of photo above) that will lead from the island end of the bridge to existing Minto Brown trails. This will make my longboard land paddling on Minto Brown Island a lot more appealing.

The new trails will total about 5000 feet, almost a mile. That's great.

Because they'll be new, the trails will be (I assume) smooth asphalt. Heaven-on-earth for longboarders, skateboarders, roller bladers, people with walkers, kids learning to ride a push-scooter, and others who have problems with the current Minto Brown trails -- most of which are highly cracked, rough, and bent out of shape in various ways.

Believe me, I know. I've become addicted to longboard land paddling. My usual Minto Brown Island route is five to seven miles. It's a heck of a lot easier and safer to roll along on the smooth surface trails, which unfortunately are a minority at the rural'ish park.

So I plan to contribute to Friends of Two Bridges, headed up by Hazel Patton. The bridge/trail project is getting close to securing the needed $9 million or so. If some grants come through later this year, construction could start in 2014. 

And maybe even be finished in the same year. Sooner the better. 

Downtown Salem needs the Minto Brown bridge. It's going to link Minto Brown, Riverfront, and Wallace Marine parks into an interconnected 20 mile trail system. Soon that will be 30 miles, with connections to Bush Park, Willamette University, and other downtown areas.

Russ Beaton, City Club president, and the speakers noted the economic development benefits of the bridge. It will make living downtown (currently only about a 100 people do) much more attractive, along with making it easy for park visitors to head downtown for food, drink, and whatever.

After the meeting I told Gorski that aging baby boomers like my wife and me want to stay active and be close to nature when/if we decide to leave our non-easy-care houses for a simpler lifestyle. An urban community, planned or otherwise, will look much better to us if it is close to trails and natural areas. 

The bridge will bring 1200 acres of mostly unspoiled Minto Brown Island land within 300 feet of downtown Salem once it is built. That will be a big draw for residents and visitors alike. It was noted that bicycling and running organizations are going to love the bridge.

A Salem marathon would be big business. And run through a beautiful Minto Brown setting.

All in all, I came away from the meeting much impressed. Gorski, Norris, and Patton are three highly competent women who are doing a great job with this project. Listening to them made me think, "Maybe Salem finally is poised to be the city cynics like me have been wishing for, but doubt could ever happen."

After the meeting I couldn't resist heading to Minto Brown Island Park, since my longboard, land paddle, and protective gear were in my car -- as they almost always are. I put in five enjoyable miles on the trails, mostly rain-free.

Minto Brown is a marvelous Salem city asset. When the pedestrian bridge opens, many more people are going to be able to enjoy it.

(A carless woman noted that currently bicycling to the park requires a lengthy ride down River Road, even though the park is only a short ways from downtown; she's excited about the bridge.)

Why can't Salem have ONE organic vegan restaurant like this?

My daughter stuck a (figurative) knife in my heart today. Well, make that in my stomach. 

I'd just finished five miles of longboard land paddling at Minto Brown Island Park here in Salem, Oregon. I was pleasantly tired. Also, not-so-pleasantly hungry. 

Checking my iPhone, I saw that Celeste, who lives in Studio City, California, had sent me a text message. We've been talking about us coming down for a visit.

Guess she wanted to entice me and my wife, health-conscious vegetarians that we are.

Just discovered a new veggie restaurant in the valley you guys will love!

I asked what the name of it was. She sent a link to the Sun Cafe web site.

Geez. There is nothing, absolutely nothing, like this anywhere in Salem. Not one single freaking restaurant here, so far as I know, even has menu selections like Sun Cafe. Check out the tantalizing menu.

(If you're a habitual non-organic meat-eater, you won't be tantalized.)

Oregonians like to feel superior to southern California.

But from our considerable experience with being taken out to eat by my daughter when we visit, she and her husband not being avid cooks, and my granddaughter being a bit too young to prepare meals at the age of five, I can say that most locales in Oregon are way inferior to southern California when it comes to healthy tasty vegetarian eating.

I can't tell you how many times we've gone to a organic vegan/vegetarian restaurant down there which is absolutely packed with people of all ages, most of them looking decidedly fitter and trimmer than supposedly more outdoorsy Oregonians. 

They aren't afraid of kale. Or whole wheat tortillas. Or creative food combinations that would make most people in Salem rush to a Subway sandwich.

I sincerely, if perhaps optimistically, believe that a restaurant like Sun Cafe could succeed here in sleepy Salem.

Heck, there's well over 150,000 people in the area. Not all of them consider Olive Garden to be great Italian food. Many are looking for something creatively different. 

Some months back I heard about a Laughing Planet restaurant opening in the Portland area. That depressed me just like my daughter's text message did. I sent this email to the Laughing Planet folks.

Have never heard back from them. Unfortunately, they probably know too much about Salem taste buds.

Emergency! Help! Salemites in distress!

We need you here in Salem! There are lots of health-minded, unique-food loving people like my wife and me here. But Salem has imprisoned us in an "Organic? Healthy? Suck it." zone.

You zipped right by Salem on your way to expand in Corvallis and Eugene. Need directions? I'd be glad to direct you to some choice empty storefronts downtown, or in south Salem, where the cool people (like us) live.

Seriously... Consider Salem. We got a Trader Joe's last year. TJ must do a lot of marketing research before deciding to open a store. Salem is changing from "So-Lame," albeit slowly. There's a hunger, both metaphorical and literal, for a restaurant that isn't more of the same. 

I can't guarantee you success. Well, I can, if you promise to come to Salem. (I just won't sign the guarantee.) Your menu reminds me of a mix of Native Foods and Cafe Yumm, both of which my wife and I love. There are many other people like us in Salem, starving for a Laughing Planet. 

Bring us a smile. 

Vision for Salem's riverfront development to be shown April 1

I'm not a big fan of how plans for Salem's downtown riverfront have devolved from a classy, creative, cool mixed use development to rental apartments and a medical rehabilitation facility.

Nonetheless, I'd go to what seems to be a "sales job" for what's being called the Riverfront Park Community if the day and time didn't conflict with my Monday Tai Chi class. 

It's Monday, April 1, 5:00 pm at the Carousel. Refreshments!

I hope someone else will attend the gathering, then tell their tale. Here's info about it. I'm interested in learning more about what's planned for the old Boise Cascade property. But not so interested to miss Tai Chi.

This is the flyer in PDF form:

Download Riverfront apartments flyer

Eugene newspaper looks at Salem's riverfront development (quoting me!)

Ah, there I am, on the front page of yesterday's Eugene Register Guard, pondering the future of Salem's riverfront, wondering whether the re-development of a Boise Cascade industrial area into a mixed-use zone will succeed in revitalizing a part of Salem that could add so much to downtown living, working, and playing.

OK, not true.

Actually I was wondering whether the newspaper's photographer was going to make me look like an old geezer/derelict (albeit in waterproof REI gear) hanging out at a fence overlooking Minto Brown Island Park, pondering the pros and cons of taking my pack and tarp into some bushes by the railroad tracks.

Which is pretty much how I ended up looking. Fine with me. I am who I am, just as Salem is who it is. In each case, for both better and worse.

The story by Diane Dietz, "Riverfront letdown: Salem's ambitious mixed-use development project fizzles," tells the tale of how the dream of a really cool riverfront area with condos, restaurants, grocery store, paths, and other enticing amenities has shrunken to the reality of rental apartments and a medical rehabilitation facility.
Download Riverfront letdown | Local News | The Register-Guard | Eugene, Oregon 

My quotes in the story relate to what could have been, but almost certainly won't be.

Brian Hines, a Salem resident and blogger, imagined a gracious scene, as in Paris or, at least, San Antonio, with a waterfront strung with walking paths and bejeweled with restaurants.

“You could go down and walk around at night and be connected to downtown,” Hines said. “You could sit down in a nice restaurant and watch the lights.

“Developers come in with their little boards and make it all look wonderful.”

...A half-razed Boise Cascade building continues to “uglify” the prominent corner south of downtown Salem, Hines said.

...“Now, they’re going to have a fence that blocks off people from the development,” Hines said. “You’re rolling along on your roller blades or your stroller, and you want to go through the development. You can’t. There’s going to be locked gates, even gates for the paths. ...

“It’s going to be a shadow of what was promised back in 2009.”

Then there are depressing quotes from the lead developer, Jason Tokarski. 

No restaurants will offer a riverside meal.

“That’s one concept that we have thoroughly vetted and that we simply cannot get interest in from either local (restaurants) or national franchises,” said Jason Tokarski, who is overseeing the development now for his family’s Mountain West Investment Corp.

...Consequently, the Tokarskis are chastened. They’re reluctant to show watercolor renderings of development plans.

“I want to be careful that we are not showing something that gets everyone excited,” Tokarski said. “Over the years, it has been difficult to reframe the project in the public’s eyes and to help the city staff and the community understand what would really work on the site — given the economic challenges that persist.

“Salem is not a high-rent market, whether it’s commercial or retail or apartments. It’s not Portland, and neither is Eugene.”

This is what drives me nuts about Salem, a town that has continually disappointed me during the 36 years I've happily lived here (yeah, I'm like a psychologically-split battered denizen; I keep getting beaten up by the city I've shacked-up with, and choose to return for more).

Salem is a city that doesn't believe in itself.

Now, cities aren't conscious beings, so what I really mean is that too many people in Salem don't believe in themselves. They long for a more vibrant town, both culturally and economically, yet are all too willing to accept dashed dreams when their longings are tossed in the trash can of half-assed development.

I readily admit that I'm not a real estate developer.

My wife and I were investors in Salem's Sustainable Fairview, another mixed-use development that has failed to live up to expectations, but owning a few shares in a LLC is a lot different from going way out on a financial limb, like the Tokarski's are doing.

So I'm sympathetic to the attitude, "the market does the deciding." This theme runs through the first story in the Register Guard's two-part, two-city riverfront analysis: "Eugene looks to denser development by floating River City: Eugene explores mixed-use development on the Willamette."

The dream of the Riverfront Master Plan crafted by as many as 1,000 Eugene residents over a two-year period is beautiful, but translating it into reality could be difficult.

The Lane County economy is improving, but developers and banks remain wary. What they see as feasible on the 27 acres of riverfront recently mothballed by the Eugene Water & Electric Board may end up nothing like the public’s vision.

The master plan vision, illustrated in watercolors, shows multistory condominiums over a lively retail district with shops, a restaurant row, a boardwalk and a riverfront “people” area.

...Yet for any development to succeed, there has to be demand, said Ward Beck, commercial real estate broker with Windermere Real Estate of Lane County. For the project to pencil out, landlords have to get sufficient rents.

Beck’s mantra: “If the math doesn’t work, there will be nothing built.”

Beck predicts a 70 percent likelihood that the riverfront plan will sit on a shelf, and only a 30 percent chance that some kind of construction will happen.

“The chances are virtually zero that what ends up being developed will look a lot like the plan,” he said, adding, “It’s beautiful, and it would be nice.”

Yes, it sure would be nice.

To have the Salem and Eugene riverfronts be places that draw people in, elicit "oohs" and "ahs," serve as a locus for both money-making and pleasure-making activities, instill a sense of pride in citizens who now tell visitors I'll show you downtown, but there really isn't much to see or do there.

I've talked to quite a few people about what they'd like to see at Salem's riverfront. Universally, they are bullish on the success of a restaurant, or nightspot, that overlooks the water and has an appealing atmosphere.

So I wonder how intensely Jason Tokarski sought a restaurateur who'd be willing to take a gamble on a riverfront location. This just seems to me a classic example of "build it, and they will come." Salem residents are hungry for something different to assuage their hunger and thirst.

I love to use the example of Apple when criticizing the tentativeness of Salem real estate developers.

Apple makes gobs of money. And Apple doesn't really give a shit about what the "market" wants. Apple makes a market. Apple produces a product that people had no idea they needed, but when they see it, they say to themselves "I have to buy it."

Like I said, I can understand why developers build stuff that they're confident will sell in today's real estate market. However, I also am confident that if a creative, gutsy, ballsy developer threw caution to the wind and built a really out there mixed use development (which would be par for the course in Portland), it would succeed.

Wildly. 

Sadly, it looks like we'll never know whether the initial vision of Salem's Boise Cascade redevelopment could have become a successful reality. Salem awaits a developer who dreams big and refuses to wake up.

(My previous posts about Salem's riverfront are here, here, here, here, here, and here.)

David Withnell omits facts about protest at Dodge dealership

A few days ago I saw some guys holding a banner on the sidewalk in front of Salem's Withnell Dodge dealership on Commercial Street. Couldn't read the banner as I drove past. I figured it was some sort of advertising for the dealership.

Nope. It was a protest by the Pacific NW Regional Council of Carpenters. I learned this via a February 27 letter to the editor in the Statesman Journal from David Withnell.

On Jan. 23, 2013, I showed up for work to find three people in front of my Dodge dealership with a 50-foot banner stating, “Shame on Withnell Dodge — Hurts our community.” Not knowing what this was about, I called the number on the flier and asked.

Apparently the union had a labor dispute with a company that the Northwest Agricultural Show used to build their booths for their event in Portland. Our involvement was solely as an exhibitor in the show. I don’t know this union nor the company they are upset with.

The ag show was a four-day event at the end of January and, 40 days later, they are still out front of my dealership, every day, from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. How is this action helping their cause?

They admit they don’t have an issue with me, yet their misleading banner makes it look as if I’m at fault for something.

So shame on the Pacific NW Regional Council of Carpenters (from Kent, Wash.) and shame on the people who think this type of protest is beneficial or right.

Curious about what the labor dispute was about, and somewhat skeptical about Withnell's claim that his dealership was in the dark about it, I fired up Google and did some digging in cyberspace.

First, a quick look at the Council of Carpenters' Facebook page shows that the union calls "Shame On..." fairly frequently. I counted seven shame photos, including the Dodge dealership's (above). So Withnell Dodge shouldn't feel like it's being singled out. 

But shame for what?

Searching for information on what the protest was all about led me to Bill Post's blog, where he'd written "Union Thugs Picket Car Dealer in Salem." Thugs? The guys I saw on the sidewalk were just calmly standing there, holding a banner. 

A letter from the Council of Carpenters included with the post made them sound even less thuggish. The letter, dated January 16, 2013, was addressed to the Northwest Agricultural Show -- where Withnell Dodge was an exhibitor.

Withnell Dodge was cc'd along with other apparent exhibitors, so almost certainly the dealership was sent a copy of the letter. Thus when David Withnell says that he had no idea on January 23 what the protest was about, and that he had never heard of the Council of Carpenters, seemingly either he hadn't read the letter, someone at Withnell Dodge had failed to tell him about it, or the post office took more than a week to deliver mail from Kent, Washington to Salem (unlikely). 

Regardless, by February 27, when his letter to the editor was published, Withnell certainly should have been aware of what the Council of Carpenters had told the Northwest Agricultural Show and the ten cc'd exhibitors.

Here's the last two paragraphs of the letter.

I found the language courteous, albeit strong and demanding. The Council of Carpenters makes it clear that anyone associated with the Show and its claimed payment of substandard wages through a contractor is at risk of a "peaceful and lawful display of banners and distribution of handbills."

Given that Withnell Dodge was an exhibitor at the Northwest Agricultural Show, and was cc'd on the letter sent by certified mail to the director of the Show, it sure seems that David Withnell isn't justified in claiming that the union doesn't have an issue with him.

Pretty clearly, they do. Whether their gripe is justified... that's another question.

I can understand how someone could sympathize either with the Council of Carpenters, or with Withnell Dodge. My point is just that the Carpenters union contacted Withnell Dodge before the protest began and told the dealership why it might be targeted for a banner display.

Which is what has happened. The union followed through on what it said it might do. Withnell Dodge followed through on participating in the Northwest Agricultural Show. Each organization is doing what seems right to it.

No problems there.

However, what bothers me about David Withnell's letter to the editor is that he makes it sound like the protest at his dealership was a complete surprise to him, and that he has no idea why the Council of Carpenters is upset with Withnell Dodge. 

Free speech, including protesting peacefully and lawfully, is part of the American way.

Withnell Dodge should respect that right rather than wrongly portraying the Council of Carpenters as singling out the dealership for a protest without any reason.

Oh, no! Medical care facility planned for Salem's riverfront.

How many ways can Salem, Oregon depress me? More than this resident of 35 years can imagine, even after all that time. 

I'd never imagined that a giant white "Ross Dress for Less" sign would uglify the brickwork on Salem Center, greeting downtown visitors coming across the Center Street bridge with Welcome to Tackiness Land. 

Yet what I never imagined has come true.

And when plans for the industrial wasteland on the riverfront just south of downtown that used to be a Boise Cascade plant were first revealed, I never imagined that what was billed as a wonderful "mixed use" development would turn out to have two main uses: rental apartments and a rehabilitation facility.

(The trajectory of my riverfront frustrations is documented here, here, here, here, and here.

But unfantasized bad dreams do sometimes come true. Today the local newspaper reported "Care center proposed for Boise Cascade site." 

The latest proposal for the vacant Boise Cascade site could bring a $13 million medical rehabilitation facility and 50 jobs to downtown Salem.

Marquis Companies wants to build a 38,000-square-foot acute rehab center on a portion of the Boise site, said Mark Shipman, a Salem attorney who represents the site’s owners. The center would provide inpatient and outpatient care, typically on a short-term basis.

Scott Miller, director of property development for Marquis, said the company intends to be under construction by early 2014.

“We’re excited. We’re ready to go. We just need the OK from the city,” Miller said.

Mr. Miller, I'm not excited. I hope you never get to go. I hope you receive a NO from the city. After all, as the story goes on to say:

For years, the 13-acre Boise property has been touted for its potential for mixed-use development. In 2006, a study by the Urban Land Institute called for 200 condominium units, restaurants and shops, including a specialty grocery store.

Now we're getting 118 apartment units and a 52 bed rehab facility, where patients recovering from surgery or an accident will stay less than 45 days. That'll be a big draw for families visiting downtown Salem.

After their kids jump up and down after seeing the garish Ross Dress for Less sign ("Mommy, Daddy, stop, stop!!") they could actually have a good time at Riverfront Park. Finished with riding the carousel, the kids will gaze longingly at the rehabilitation facility next door, begging "Now can we see where sick people go to recover, please, please!!"

Understand, I'm not against health care facilities. I worked in health planning for quite a few years, including the Certificate of Need program that has to give a thumbs-up to this proposal.

I just think it's a horrible waste of prime downtown riverfront land to have the City of Salem give its blessing to uncreative, uninteresting, uninviting development that will go a long way toward determining the image of our not-so-fair downtown for decades, if not centuries, to come.

A Breakfast on BIkes post about this subject isn't as down on the rehab facility as I am. Yet it says:

But again, is this the kind of tenant and development that will draw people to want to live in the condos in the Boise shell?  This doesn't exactly scream, "downtown living!"  On the other hand - build the damn thing!  The site needs to be developed.  Compromise will be necessary.  I think I'm more bothered by the apartments configuration than this office and medical clinic. (What do you think?  Is there a fatal flaw here I'm missing?)

Well, I'm worried that the current understandable desire to be rid of the pile of rubble that currently is the Boise Cascade site is going to lock the citizens of Salem into saying "Hey, at least it's better than nothing" to development that likely will be a lot worse than the something that could be built not far in the future.

Real estate trends can change quickly.

My daughter tells me that the single family housing market in the Los Angeles area, where she and her husband are looking for a home, is booming. This after a few years when rentals ruled the real estate roost and few wanted to buy a house.

Once the Boise Cascade property is built on, it's going to be very difficult, if not impossible, to change its character. This is Salem's one and only chance to make that area into a truly distinctive mixed use development. 

Like so much else in Salem, I suspect we'll end up with something blah that pales in comparison to what other cities have done with their riverfront. And that's depressing.

Ross Dress for Less sign in downtown Salem is an abomination

Usually I shun the word "abomination." Sounds too Old Testament'y. As in fornication outside of wedlock is an abomination. 

Not true. But here's a genuine abomination: the Ross Dress for Less sign that was recently installed on Salem Center brickwork. 

Walking up Liberty Street, this is the garish sight that meets your eyes as you reach Center Street. A disgusting large white sign that is way larger than the moderately attractive Salem Center sign above it. The sign clashes with everything around it. Including the red brickwork.

Approaching downtown Salem from the Center Street bridge, the abomination is doubly abdominable because you can see both sides of the sign. 

This is exactly what downtown Salem does not need.

The sign is totally at odds with efforts to make the downtown area more inviting, cool, artistic, pedestrian and browsing friendly. This tacky Ross Dress for Less sign would be an eyesore at a tacky strip mall, but at least the two forms of tackiness would harmonize in their communal bad taste.

Salem Center, though, made a valiant effort -- largely successful -- to reflect the charming old brick buildings that still grace downtown Salem. Now the ugly Ross Dress for Less sign dominates the pivotal Center/Liberty landscape, screaming "welcome to a plastic tasteless downtown."

Which most of downtown isn't.

I'm writing this blog post rant a few blocks away, at The Beanery coffeehouse. Yes, I look out the front window and see "Starbucks Coffee" in white letters across the street. However, the Starbucks sign is hugely less obtrusive than the Ross Dress for Less sign.

Here's my vow, Ross Dress for Less: I will never, ever set foot in your store until that sign is replaced with a much more attractive one.

Now I probably would never have shopped there anyway, because I'm not into that style of clothing, but I'm pretty confident that the sign is going to lead other people to shun Ross Dress for Less who really would have bought stuff there.

Case in point: three letters to the editor in the Salem Statesman Journal (see here, here, and here)

Why on earth did the city of Salem Sign Code allow such a garish and ugly (as well as oversized and cheap-looking) sign to appear on the otherwise tasteful brick facade of the Salem Center mall?

Hopefully, their foolish lack of judgment can be re-thought and corrected.

This is the most important entrance to our downtown from the west.

Susan Trueblood Stuart, Salem

The Ross sign, so apply described by Susan Trueblood Stuart in her Feb. 13 letter, is indeed garish and an insult to the mall and to the city.It’s interesting to note that what stimulated a need for a sign code many years ago was the garish display of overwhelming, tasteless business signs and billboards that greeted everyone driving off the Marion Street Bridge.

Have we come a “full circle” of indifference for some sense of aesthetic value for signage and enforcement of the codes? Business signs are getting larger and more demanding; huge billboards are allowed to identify the adjacent business, and we can’t ignore those billboards whose brightly colored messages change every few seconds.

Let’s not “sign off” on Salem yet, but we could have dignified, well-designed signs that identify and inform, not distract and demand attention.

Keith Chrisman, Salem

The city of Salem has spent money on making downtown Salem more inviting and then they go and allow the large, horrific sign to be placed on Salem Center.

How could this have gone through proper channels and still be allowed?

The sign needs to be changed.

Diane Plummer, Salem

Willamette Week reports status of Oregon weed scene

Nice overview in alternative newspaper Willamette Week of how marijuana is getting more and more mainstream in oh-so-green Oregon.

(Thanks to Jack Bogdanski for cluing me in to the stories via a blog post, since it's tough to find copies of WW down here in not-cool Salem.)

I found "You're Not High in Portland Until... 28 things to do when stoned in Stumptown" particularly entertaining.

Someday I hope the reporter will write a similar piece about Salem. Likely it wouldn't take too long. If he or she gets to 3 things to do, I'd be amazed.

Ride Riverfront Carousel... stare at Golden Man on top of capitol building... geez, I can't even get to three.

Being married to a dog-crazed woman, I took special note of one of Portland's 28: 

Do happy hour at Sniff Dog Hotel... Sip a coffee and watch a bunch of dogs go insane in the next room. Wouldn’t it be weird if instead of shaking hands, we sniffed each other’s butts?

Excellent idea. The happy hour, I mostly mean. The Sniff Dog Hotel does indeed have a happy hour at its cafe from 5 to 7 pm, Monday-Saturday. 

It all goes down Mon-Sat from 5-7pm. Come in and relax while your dog plays in our indoor park for free.

To insure doggie harmony, canine guests enjoying happy hour in the dog park will need to pass a brief temperament evaluation and be current on vaccinations prior to playtime. 

Please call ahead to schedule a temperament test 503-208-2366 — think of it as a simple “meet and greet”.

Let your dog run freely in our indoor 2000 sq. ft park
Watch the game or other events on our flat screen TV's
Free WiFi
Enjoy outdoor seating with your dog, weather permitting of course
Rent out the cafe for a special event, call 503-208-2366 for details

Sounds great. We don't have anything like that in Salem.

Well, that's not quite true. We do have a place where people can watch domesticated mammals running around crazily, vocalizing loudly for little or no reason, engaging in energetic nonsensical activities that have no discernable purpose.

It's called the Oregon legislature.

Salem's riverfront development looking better, but not great

If you're a Salem, Oregon area resident who isn't regularly reading the Breakfast on Bikes blog, you should be!

It's not really about bicycling, though it partly is. Many, if not most, of the posts are focused on how our sometimes-fair city needs to improve alternative transportation and mixed use options.

Today's blog offering is an excellent overview of what's happening (and what isn't) with the re-development of the old Boise Cascade industrial property along Salem's riverfront: "Proposed Apartments for Boise Site Turn Backs on Park."

I agree with the overall conclusion. 

It's great news that things are heating up again on the Boise redevelopment project.

Interestingly, the condos in the Boise shell itself are on the backburner, and apartments for what had been the third phase are now on the table. The location has significant challenges for different kinds of access as it is hemmed in by the railroad, park, and creek on each side. It's not likely an easy site to work with. But...there's always buts.

...More particularly, the design, called The Residences at Riverfront Park, actually turns its back on the Park and creates something of a gated community instead of a procession of interesting urban spaces from public, to private-public, to private. On the edges and at transitions, it doesn't collaborate very well with the park.  But because of its location and the incentives offered by the City for developing it, it is reasonable to ask that it collaborate and be a better partner.  

...Fortunately there is a space fronting the Carousel parking lot designated commercial.  One can only hope for a cafe and sidewalk seating by the playground!  Or something like that, anyway.  That certainly looks like what the architect envisions in the elevation showing the entry drive.   Maybe a wider sidewalk and a couple fewer parking stalls???  (The site plan may show a wider sidewalk.)

...In particular, I'm sure there are ways the transitions between the park and private space could have been managed to create a more inviting and dynamic set of edge conditions, conditions for strolling and even for commerce. The massing and fencing just creates too much of a compound or mall enclosed and separated from Park and City.

In general, the style and site plan feels like something that belongs more in the suburbs than right downtown.  It's not terrible, but it could be better.

Such is Salem: a town that regresses toward mediocrity whenever an opportunity for great presents itself. We've seen this with downtown, the riverfront, Sustainable Fairview, Kroc Center, Keizer Station, the conference center, and other development efforts that end up being less than the Wow! they initially seem capable of.

I've been depressed about how the Boise Cascade re-development was looking. (See here and here.) But the current plans appear to be an improvement. 

I expected, though, that the development would be better integrated with Riverfront Park. Currently there's an ugly chain link fence separating the two. A new fancy chain link fence is a step in the right direction, I guess. 

Just not what I was hoping for. Much will be forgiven, however, if a Cafe Yumm! or Native Foods restaurant ends up in the commercial zone close to the Carousel. Salem desperately needs more healthy/tasty vegetarian dining options.

Unfunny humor about gun control

Yesterday a bunch of people brought guns to the Oregon capitol building. They paraded outside showing off their rifles, handguns, shotguns, and other pseudo-macho paraphenalia.

Some even brought them inside, since Oregon is one of the few states that allow someone with a concealed handgun permit to carry around a military-style assault rifle in the halls of a Capitol. 

Now, news of this sort of event should stimulate a reasonable question: "Who the heck would be so crazy as to carry guns around in public like that for no good reason?"

After all, if I was a tourist visiting a state capitol, started to walk in, and saw a crowd brandishing weapons, I'd think What the #$@! are these fools up to? 

Reading newspaper reports of yesterday''s anti-gun control rally, I didn't get an answer to that query. There seemed to be no point to the gathering other to give some gun owners an opportunity to show off their toys in public.

What gets me, every time I see black-clad guys and gals strutting around with their weapons, is how little they have to be proud about. It takes zero courage and zero skill to own a gun. All you need is a VISA card. Shooting defenseless animals from long range, or defenseless targets, earns zero "guts points." 

I respect people who take risks. For twenty years or so I've been active in various forms of martial arts. People who fight other people skilled in fighting, even in a controlled situation, deserve a big thumbs-up for having the guts to risk getting hurt in the course of developing their skills.

Ditto for combat soldiers who use their guns to fight guys who also have guns. But walking around the Oregon Capitol with an AR-15... that's ridiculously lame. 

The whole "look at me with my big guns!" thing would be comical if it wasn't so unfunny. Doonesbury nailed the dark humor of this country's failure to protect our citizens from guns in a February 3 strip.

Several letters to the editor in today's Oregonian mentioned the unfunny comic. Here's one:

The Feb. 3 Doonesbury comic expressed my thoughts far more precisely than I could have written.

To quote: "What are we like as a people? ... Nine years ago we were attacked. 3,000 people died. In response, we started two long, bloody wars and built a vast homeland security apparatus -- all at a cost of trillions. ... During those same nine years, 270,000 Americans were killed by gunfire at home. Our response? We weakened gun laws."

I grew up in eastern Oregon and learned to use a gun for hunting game or for killing predators. A real sportsman/woman does not use a semi-automatic weapon.

I do not believe the majority of Americans, nor Oregonians, believe we need semi-automatic weapons, a gun on every corner or on every person walking down the street, and certainly not in our schools.

Our children are far too precious to grow up in that kind of gun culture.

ROBERTA HUNTER PARSONS-WACHHOLZ 
Northwest Portland

Nicely said, Roberta. You make good sense. Way more than a speaker at the We Want More Killings rally at the capitol made. The Salem Statesman Journal reported:

Republican lawmakers who spoke at the rally Friday said the Constitution is under attack and that they would fight for the Second Amendment rights of Oregonians.

Rep. Tim Freeman, R-Roseburg, is drafting legislation to be introduced next week called the “Second Amendment Preservation Act.” Freeman’s office would not provide any details about the bill Friday, but a speaker during the rally told participants it would make it illegal to enforce any new federal gun control measures that infringed upon Second Amendment rights.

Wow. More unfunny humor.

These supposed defenders of the Constitution have no idea how the Constitution works. Instead of marching around with their guns, they should spend more time learning about what makes our country great -- as ably designed by our founding fathers.

Ever heard of the Supreme Court, Rep. Freeman and unnamed gun rally speaker? This is who gets to ultimately decide what is constitutional and what isn't. Other courts make that determination before a case gets to the Supreme Court.

You can't pass a law that defines what the Second Amendment says, or doesn't say. The Supreme Court gets to do that saying. 

Like I said, this sort of ignorance would be comical if it wasn't so unfunny. People who are clueless about the Constitution are pretending that they're the only ones standing between us and tyranny. That's hilarious. 

Except, it isn't funny.

Salem needs an "Edwards Addition" like Monmouth has

OK, let's get past the name of this otherwise-cool housing development: Edwards Addition, which sounds like a boring afterthought, is anything but.

Today my wife and I met the developer, Eric Olsen, at the Mid-Valley Home Show (Americraft Building, State Fairgrounds, today through Sunday).

We'd just started to browse the show when I heard "Brian and Laurel!" Turning toward the Olsen Design and Development booth, which likely we would have walked right past otherwise, Molly Beecroft greeted us cheerily. 

Molly is a former neighbor, and current realtor, who works with Eric. Her charm and my desire for a free gift soon had me filling out cards which likely will guarantee that I'll be on the Olsen Development mail/email list forever, or for the rest of my life, whichever comes first.

And you know... I don't mind. 

Because Laurel and I ended up becoming genuinely enthusiastic about what Eric and his team have wrought in Monmouth. I knew next to nothing about Edwards Addition before today. Now I hope Olsen Development will bring similar housing to Salem, a distinct possibility according to Eric.

We like new old-style houses. Front porches, cars tucked in back, on tree-lined streets, modern inside with some "green" features. This is the Edwards Addition Flex House, an interesting concept for people who, well, want flexibility in their residence.

Seems reasonable at $299,000. Sq Ft: 2828 Bedrooms: 4 Baths: 3.5 

Currently Laurel and I aren't interested in giving up our rural non-easy-care home on ten acres, which I described to Eric as "a place that simultaneously drives us crazy and makes us really happy." But almost certainly that day will come.

Like lots of people in their 60's, we abhor the idea of growing old with bingo, bridge, and group visits to the mall. Yet the prospect of remaining enslaved to never-ending blackberry/poison oak control, yard maintenance, well water hassles, fallen tree chainsawing, and the like doesn't thrill us either.

When "that day" arrives, we'll be looking for a community like Edwards Addition (except with a cooler name, please). 

It's hard to put into words why we were so attracted to Eric's development style after talking with him and browsing around his web sites. I guess what struck me the most was his mention, after we quizzed him about Green building practices, that sustainability involves much more than just the "built environment."

Absolutely. We're looking for a sense of community when we move.

A place with people like us. Not exactly like us; that'd be boring. But people who like to sit on their porches and say "hi" to their neighbors, get involved in their neighborhood association, socialize together, help each other, be more than just barely recognizable "they're the ones who live three houses down."

I like how the Master Plan page on the Edwards Addition web site ends with:

Intangibles

Probably most exciting are the things you can’t master plan, but grow out of a diversity of people and concern for the built environment.  Book clubs, community gardens, holiday open houses and a Halloween parade are a few things we could have never designed, but organically formed from the desire to become a neighborhood beyond sticks and mortar.

Through the grace of Great God Google I came across a newspaper story about Eric Olsen and his wife, Eve. Starts out with:

Eric and Eve Olsen envision apple and pear trees fronting Martin Way in the Edwards Addition neighborhood in South Monmouth.

To the east is where potatoes, pumpkins and tomatoes might go -- or maybe something else. They haven't decided yet.

There would surely be an herb and salad garden ... and plots for carrots, beets and cabbage. If city ordinances allow it, there might be a place for a small free-range area for chickens.

Nice. Here they are in an acre of wheat they planted. Now the enterprise has evolved into a Village Farm maintained by Edwards Addition residents, complete with Facebook page (of course).

Laurel and I told Eric that he should bring his development philosophy to Salem. We need a mixed use, sustainable community like Edwards Addition here.

Yes, Pringle Creek Community is great. But more is better, and Pringle Creek (I hate to say this, but its true) is too cutting-edge Green to appeal to a large portion of the Salem market. We aren't Portland, Corvallis, Eugene, or Ashland -- though I sure wish Salem had a vibe a lot closer to those more cutting-edge cities.

But, hey, if Monmouth can embrace Edwards Addition, potentially 470 homes on 88 acres, it sure seems like Salem can do the same with a similar sort of development. 

Perusing the most recent quarterly Olsen Design and Development newsletter, I read a piece by Eric that showed his philosophically thoughtful side. "Awake at the Wheel" talked about the lessons of the Challenger space shuttle disaster, caused by improperly designed O-rings 

To think of those O-rings and how that system failed is to be reminded of how haunting the results of inattention can be. We all are entrenched in the routines of many communities — at home, at work and at play. For me, as part of a creative company dedicated to improving the built environment, the big challenge is to know when the status quo should be left to slumber, and when it could use a good wake up call. 

Believe me, Eric, Salem shouldn't be left to slumber. This city already is overly deserving of its nickname, So-Lame. I hope you ride into town on your developer horse and shake things up. 

One request, Eric: as I mentioned to you today, I'm into longboard land paddling. That's why I was pleased to hear that Edwards Addition has nicely flat streets. Sweet! Or as we skateboarders say, Sick!

So make sure that, if you ever build here in Salem, the CC&Rs have a section on skateboarding. They need to say "highly encouraged." Especially for those over 60. Like I said, us aging baby boomers are a different breed of retired folks. 

Natural Grocers coming to Salem. We're not excited.

My wife and I love LifeSource Natural Foods, currently Salem"s one and only natural food store.

Health-minded eaters that we are, vegetarian and organic-leaning, we enjoy the friendly atmosphere and good selection of food at LifeSource.

However, we also lust after a Whole Foods, Market of Choice, New Seasons, or other larger natural food store with more choices and lower prices. Usually when we're in Portland, Corvallis, or Eugene, we stop at one of the stores that Salem should have, given its population, but doesn't.

So I was more than a little excited when I glanced at the front page of the Statesman Journal a few days ago and saw "Natural foods store set to open in June." 

Unfortunately, a few lines of reading knocked me back to reality. Salem wasn't getting a cool natural foods store, but a Natural Grocers store. Never having heard of Natural Grocers, I didn't know what the chain was like. 

Clearly, though, it wasn't a Whole Foods, Market of Choice, or New Seasons. 

A fast-growing organic foods retailer, which has sprouted 60 stores in 12 states, will soon compete for Salem’s grocery dollars.

Natural Grocers by Vitamin Cottage Inc. intends to open a Salem store by June, said Merredith Branscombe, a company spokeswoman. Branscombe couldn’t confirm the Salem store’s address, but city officials have approved a site plan for a 16,000-square-foot grocery store at 4250 Commercial St. SE.

...The retailer sells only organic products and bans anything with hormones, antibiotics, pesticide residue or artificial colors from its shelves. The full-service grocery also sells nutritional supplements, body care and pet products.

Anything owned by a "Vitamin Cottage" didn't sound like a cool, hip, cutting edge addition to Salem's (a.k.a. So-Lame) natural food scene. Checking out the Natural Grocers' web site, I came across a decidedly unexciting video tour of what they call a "real health food store."

 

This looks to me like a "Vitamin Cottage" that grew into a rather sterile natural food store. Meaning, without much charisma, energy, creativity, zest. My wife and I watched the video with a growing sense of...

LifeSource Natural Foods doesn't have a lot to worry about. 

Understand: we wish Natural Grocers success. I just don't see much, if anything, that the Natural Grocers store will offer that we need or want. Probably a bigger selection of some brands, especially in the vitamin area. 

Yawn. 

There's no deli in a Natural Grocers store. That's a deal-killer for us, and a big reason why we like Whole Foods so much. We don't like to cook, but we like to eat healthy, tasty, reasonably-priced vegetarian food. Takeout from the LifeSource deli section is a big part of our weekly diet.

Natural Grocers won't compete with LifeSource on that front. Which likely will make us occasional browsers in the Salem store, but not regular customers.

Salem still has a long way to go before it catches up to its much cooler sister cities to the north and south, Portland, Corvallis, and Eugene. Natural Grocers is a baby step in that direction, nothing more. And as long as I'm complaining...

Today I learned from a sign on the front what store is going in next to the south Salem Trader Joe's that opened last year. Ugh! A Tuesday Morning. Unbelievable. 

I've never been in one. My wife tells me it is a discount store, not even as nice as T.J. Maxx. I'd been envisioning a hip healthy restaurant to match Trader Joe's. Maybe a Cafe Yumm, which we love.

But no, Salem gets another blah store selling blah stuff. Which doesn't quite describe how Natural Grocers looks to me. Disturbingly close, though.

I count the irritations, waiting in line at the post office

Oh, irritating irritations, I had plenty of time to count you up during my lengthy wait at Salem's Vista Station post office today.

(1) Walking in the door at about 2:30 pm on a Tuesday, a time I figured would be pleasingly low key busy-wise, and finding about a dozen people lined up in the small lobby. I only needed to pick up a package that required a signature. Didn't want to come back; didn't want to run the risk of having our mailhuman try to deliver it again at a day we weren't home.

(2) So I decided to do the Post Office Wait Dance. I'm good at standing still. First thought, though, was to see whether any P.O. employee was at the mail dropoff counter on the right. Occasionally when lines are long at Vista, someone will stand there and handle package/mail pickups that don't involve a financial transaction. But, nope, two regular registers were staffed. Nobody else in sight.

(3) After a few minutes, a woman walks in with a young girl. She strides right up to the mail dropoff counter, ignoring the lengthy line. Standing there, she looks at the P.O. employee at the register to her left: "I need to pick up my mail. Can someone help me?" She's told, "No, sometimes a person is available to do that; not today; you'll have to wait in line."

(4) Her child says, "I have to go potty!" The mother says, "You'll have to wait; there's no bathroom here; I thought there might be; that's why we came in." Jeez. How could anyone think a United States Post Office would have restroom facilities for the general public? For one thing, I've never seen a post office with a restroom. For another thing, it's a great idea, so naturally it will never happen.

(5) A guy near the front of the line is called up to the counter. "Good," I think. "I've just moved up a spot." Then I notice the stack of large envelopes he's carrying. "Not good," I think. I've seen this game play out before: a self-employed guy mailing a bunch of his daily whatever's which take forever to process because each has to be individually weighed, stamped, return receipt requested, etc. etc. 

(6) I ponder getting my iPhone out and playing with it, check my email, New York Times, Twitter feed. But I'm engrossed in my increasing irritation. Somehow I feel that if I stare sullenly at the two P.O. employees working at the counter, they'll get the message to call for help to deal with the now even longer line of waiting people.

(7) I picture how, at LifeSource Natural Foods and Trader Joe's, staff will ring a bell when just three or four customers are in line, and staff will stop what they're doing and open up another register. I can hear voices in the back of the post office. What the hell are those servants-of-the-public doing that's more important than serving the not-very-patiently-waiting public? The woman with the kid is still having to tell her daughter, "There's no bathroom here; you'll just have to wait; no, I won't put you down, you'll run away."

(8) The guy with the stack of envelopes is still being served at the counter. Quite a few other people have been helped by the only other P.O. employee. I now see that mailing each and every envelope of his requires an astonishing amount of typing into a computer terminal by the employee serving him. I shift my irritated eyeballs to the guy's back. "Why the hell did you choose the busiest station in south Salem to mail your hugely time-consuming stuff?" I mentally beam into his inconsiderate brain. "Pringle Station is just a few minutes away; it's almost always nearly empty." 

(9) I do some quick calculations. The guy could have driven to Pringle Station and back in less than 15 minutes. By the time I reach the front of the line, the guy is still standing there, watching the P.O. employee enter hugely complicated codes for sending restricted items to Somalia, or whatever the heck is taking such a long time to do. I swear to Zeus: at least ten people were served by the other P.O. employee staffing the counter during the twenty minutes or more it took this guy's stack of envelopes to be mailed. Each wasted ten minutes or so of his/her life, since the line would have moved twice as fast without the guy's counter blockage. Ten times ten is 100 person-minutes. If he'd driven to Pringle, he would have incurred an extra fifteen minutes himself. Where's your compassionate Buddha-nature, jerk?!

(10) I then get irritated at how irritated I am. Where's my own patient Zen acceptance of How Things Are? 

Anyway, another fun day at the post office.

Waiting in line, I fantasized about having the whole damn outfit taken over by UPS or Federal Express, with all of the idiots currently running the USPS fired. But the small part of my brain not consumed with irritation thought: "That'd be no better, most likely. And surely more expensive."

I actually like and appreciate the USPS most of the time. They just need to figure out how to handle lines a lot better. (It's likely, though, that staff cutbacks and foolish interference in post office operations by Congress has made this almost impossible to do.)

Grocery stores have self-checkout, twelve items or less, and regular checkout areas. Sure seems like the post office could figure out something similar, and have some employees ready to jump in and help when the line is going out the door, as happens disturbingly often at the Vista Station.

Starbucks' new Blueberry Oatmeal worth the extra buck

Today Starbucks started off by disappointing me, but ended up deliciously surprising me. Love your new Blueberry Oatmeal! It's a winner.

Once again, the West Salem Starbucks didn't have any multigrain bagels by the noon'ish time I arrived for my regular Sunday get-together with some friends.

That always irritates me, since the only stuff health-conscious me likes to eat at Starbucks are the multigrain bagels and the oatmeal. But since I have oatmeal for breakfast every day but Sunday (when I make a gigantic whole grain pancake), I prefer the different'ness of the bagel.

Sounding as pathetic as possible, I told the barista, "Well... since you don't have any multigrain bagels, I'll take some oatmeal."

He cheerily replied, "Do you want to try the new blueberry oatmeal?" "Sure," I told him. I'd added freshly unfrozen blueberries to my pancake just a few hours earlier. But, hey, I like blueberries.

And I sure liked Starbucks' Blueberry Oatmeal. So does this other reviewer.

The steel cut oats, now blended with rolled oats, must account with the new let-sit-for-five-minutes instructions on the container, up from three minutes (after hot water is added). I dutifully checked my watch and waited the requisite time.

I enjoyed stirring in the whole blueberries, pouring the agave nectar over the oats, and sprinkling on the fruit, nut, and seed medley package. This is a big improvement, both health- and taste-wise, from the brown sugar, dried fruit, and a different nut mixture in the old rolled oats oatmeal.

Having paid with my iPhone's Starbucks app, I had no idea what the Blueberry Oatmeal cost. Overly optimistically, I sort of assumed it'd be the same price as the original oatmeal offering.

Checking my app just now, I found that a grande Pike Place and oatmeal cost me $1.10 more today than last Sunday. So that must be the price difference between the new and old oatmeal.

Almost certainly I'll continue to pay it. The Blueberry Oatmeal is worth an extra buck.

Good going, Starbucks. Hope you keep on adding healthier food choices. Your breakfast pastries could benefit from more whole-grain items than the single multigrain bagel. How about a whole-wheat scone?

New "Vancouvria" episode shows how scary Portland is

I love Vancouvria. Though only disseminated via You Tube, It's a lot funnier than the IFC's Portlandia in my utterly objective and unarguable opinion.

Episode 1 of Season 2 has been released by the Vancouvria folks. It's great!

"Big City Survival Class" shows how Vancouverites who are terrified of crossing the Columbia into Portland are cured of their fears. Sort of. Have a look, and laugh.

 

Seemingly I shouldn't be too scared of Portland, judging from the final few minutes of the video showing photos of the Vancouverites making their post-therapy field trip to the Mysterious Land across the bridge.

I ride a skateboard.

OK, a longboard, but that's an intimate relative of what's shown in one of the photos. I also have no problem with naked bike riding. Or naked anything, for that matter. And I usually wear a "hoodie" sweatshirt that bears a close tye-dyed resemblance to an item of clothing that repels two Vancouverites.

Here's me.

And here's a scene from "Big City Survival Class."

However, I will admit to being clueless about how to ride Portland mass transit, especially light rail and streetcars. Back in my Portland State University days, the 1970's, I was adept at riding Tri Met buses.

Now I'm almost as wary of the MAX light rail system as the Vancouvria guy who thinks "M" stands for murder. Watching Portland news from the safety of our rural south Salem home, we regularly see reports of muggings, beatings, and other mayhem on MAX. 

So far as I remember, though, none of these involved a gray-haired senior citizen wearing a colorful tye-dyed hoodie with "Neskowin" emblazoned across the front. I should be OK if I ever dare to set foot on MAX.

Keep up the creative energy, Vancouvria. I look forward to the rest of your Season 2 episodes. There's got to be an episode focused on Washington's recently-passed laws that legalize marijuana and gay marriage, especially since Oregon hasn't legalized either.

In September I correctly anticipated that marijuana tourism would be coming to Washington state from Portlanders and other Oregonians. Sounds like a great way for Vancouvria to show that their town is cooler than Portland -- in a few ways.

Not Salem though. This is the comment I left on the latest Vancouvria You Tube video.

Us residents of Salem, affectionately known as So-lame to locals in the know, are afraid of visiting BOTH Portland and Vancouver. We've heard there actually are people on the sidewalks downtown in those cities. Scary! I'm used to a pleasingly boring and deserted downtown. Also, reportedly noise comes from restaurants and other night spots after 11 pm in Portland and Vancouver because people are inside... still awake! Super scary.

Dark Sky radar image of Northwest shows -- shock! -- RAIN.

There's some good news and bad news in this iPhone screenshot I took a few minutes ago of Dark Sky's radar image of the western United States.

Good news: Almost everywhere, it isn't raining or snowing. Note all the black.

Bad news: We in the Pacific Northwest are getting hammered by storms. Light blue is lighter precipitation; reddish purple is heavier precipitation. 

I love Dark Sky. It makes crappy weather more entertaining. Or at least, more predictable. The app is pretty darn accurate when it comes to forecasting rain or snow in the next hour.

And the radar images, both local and countrywide, are terrific.

Statesman Journal endorsement of Romney: pathetic editorial

There's good opinion/editorial writing, and there's poor opinion/editorial writing. Our (sadly) one and only local daily newspaper, Gannett's Salem Statesman Journal, falls into the "poor" category. 

The paper's endorsement of Mitt Romney yesterday offered a prime example of why the editorial section should be held up before journalism students as an example of how not to write an opinion piece. 

Understand: I enjoy reading well-reasoned, thoughtful, factual opinions by conservative columnists whom I usually disagree with politically. David Brooks is one. I can follow his train of thought and appreciate how he came to his point of view even if it strikes me as ill-advised.

However the Statesman Journal, under the leadership of editorial page editor Dick Hughes, notoriously starts and ends its opinion pieces with unfounded assertions -- facts, logic, and reason nowhere to be seen in the middle. 

Back in 2007 some fellow land use advocates and I met with Hughes after the Statesman Journal had published an editorial opposing the passage of Measure 49, which restored vital protections to Oregon's farm and forest land.

We wanted to point out serious factual misstatements in the editorial. Our goal was to show Hughes that the conclusion he reached -- Measure 49 was a bad idea -- wasn't supported by his mistaken assumptions in the editorial. 

Shockingly, Hughes angrily jumped up and started to leave the coffee shop where we were conversing. He was angry, apparently offended that someone was pointing out facts and assertions that he'd gotten wrong. "This is just opinion!" he said.

Wow.

I'd always thought newspaper endorsements were supposed to reflect more than just one person's subjective feelings. Figuring that this thought was more right than wrong, I proved myself correct by checking out ethical codes of conduct for editorial writers. 

Turns out that the Statesman Journal Measure 49 editorial was decidedly ethically dubious, in my carefully reasoned, fact-based opinion.

The Romney endorsement strikes me as coming from the same mold: virtually free of important substantive facts; personal opinions unsupported by fair conclusions concerning how those absent facts relate to the public good.

Wouldn't you think that a newspaper's endorsement of a presidential candidate would refer to the candidate's positions on crucial issues, and why those positions are better than what his/her opponent wants to do?

I sure did.

So it was disturbing to see that the Statesman Journal told us nothing, zilch, nada, about where Romney wants to lead the country. The only substantive policy noted in the editorial was Obamacare, which the editorial board admits it likes "in concept" (whatever that means). And which Romney has vowed to repeal.

Thus we didn't get any mention of how these Romney goals relate to the public good of Oregonians:

--Doing away with the Affordable Care Act and near-universal health insurance coverage, given Oregon's strong state commitment to related health care reform.

-- Abolishing efforts to reduce carbon emissions and other air pollutants causing both global warming and thousands of premature deaths.

-- Reducing tax rates across the board, including a continuation of Bush's tax breaks for the very wealthy, a $6 trillion or so cost, plus increasing military spending by $2 trillion, producing a $8 trillion hole in the federal budget prior to any efforts to decrease the already high current deficit. 

-- Changing Medicare to a voucher program and repealing "Obamacare" benefits that almost certainly will increase out-of-pocket costs to senior citizens.

-- Markedly slashing federal social programs, and indeeed virtually every program other than the Defense Department (which hasn't asked for the $2 trillion Romney wants to lavish on it).

-- Overturning Roe v. Wade, thereby making abortion illegal in many or most states, along with allowing employers to decide whether they want to include contraception coverage in their health plans. 

-- Permitting much increased oil and gas drilling on public lands, along with off-shore areas; gutting, if not eliminating, the Environmental Protection Agency.

I could go on. But I won't.

You get the idea of how cowardly the Statesman Journal editorial board was in not addressing any of Romney's specific policy proposals. I say "cowardly" because it's easy to take a political stand without proclaiming what, exactly, you are committed to.

The Statesman Journal said it admires Romney's flip-flopping. Sure, birds of a feather flock together. Gutless panderers without firm ethical convictions like each other.

Amazingly, in a related editorial the Statesman Journal editorial board said that its Romney endorsement shouldn't be used to justify "impressions of our editorial stance throughout the year." Huh? Of course it does. 

Just look at the list of policies I listed above that the Statesman Journal has endorsed, given its thumbs-up to a candidate who supports those policies. Yes, the editorial contained some blather about how we don't agree with all of Romney's positions.

Well, the editorial board must agree with most of them, or they wouldn't have endorsed Romney.

So we have to assume that among more tax cuts for the wealthy, slashing social programs, making Medicare into a voucher program, doing away with environmental protections, turning over much more private land to the oil and gas industry, undoing increased mileage requirements for American cars, regulating Wall Street more strictly, and overturning Roe v. Wade, the Salem Statesman Journal editorial board is in favor of most of these.

Except it won't say so, because it is a gutless editorial board which wanted to endorse Romney without endorsing any of Romney's far-right positions. 

Pathetic. 

Photos of 2012 Willamette Humane Society Boo Bash

This was the first year we played adult "dress up" and went to the Halloween-themed Boo Bash fundraiser put on every year here in Salem by the Willamette Humane Society. Last year Laurel and I volunteered to do clean-up duties after the event.

I saw enough people hanging around in clever/cute costumes to make me want to attend as a real Boo Bash'er this year. Laurel found me a Witch Doctor costume which meshed nicely with a mask I got at the Oregon Country Fair.

I was mildly disturbed by how much I enjoyed channeling my inner Witch Doctor. I heard a few people mutter "scary" when I walked by. Sweet!

Laurel, animal lover that she is, embraced her inner raccoon. Her tail (not shown) stayed on perfectly. I thought she looked super-cute, but Laurel didn't like the itchiness of her costume's fake fur. Maybe she'll be the Witch Doctor next year.

If so, I know who I won't be at the 2013 Boo Bash: Jesus. This guy was so convincing, it'd be tough to follow his act. (Of course, who knows what Jesus really looked like?) During dinner he traded in what seems to be a mixed drink for a glass of red wine. Much more appropriate.

We came across a tall devil'ish woman who reminded us of Betsy, my optometrist. Couldn't have been, of course, given Betsy's dignified professional demeanor whenever I get an eye exam. After whoever this person was asked me, "Who am I?," I'm proud to say that my 64-year old brain took only a few seconds to reply "Devil with a blue dress on." And even prouder, after a few seconds more, to add "Mitch Ryder and the Detroit Wheels." Showing my age. Have a look and listen, clueless younger people. Great song.

I loved the "Reno 911" gang. For a while this was one of our favorite TV shows. Terrific cynical off-color humor. These Boo Bashers played their roles well.

The Reno 911 woman had a more attractive backside than the guys, for sure. Both physically and philosophically. I started to recall some existentialist "guilty" theme from my college reading days, but the two large complimentary glasses of Pinot Noir I'd consumed made me feel "Can't remember; who gives a shit?"

This woman, who seemed to be part of the Reno 911 crew, dragged a stuffed pony around all night. First time I saw her, I wondered why. After the second glass of wine, it made wonderful (non) sense.

There were several Snow White's at the Boo Bash. I'm sure this version won't mind me giving him the Least Attractive But Most Gutsy award.

Waiting for our terrific vegetarian dinner to be served, I entertained myself by taking photos of myself, then marveling at how much I enjoyed my Witch Doctor self. Please, please, let reincarnation be real!

Salem Weekly exposes City Council's trashing of Sustainable Fairview

Excellent job, Salem Weekly editors.

Your reporting in "Master Plan? What Master Plan? The Lesson of Sustainable Fairview" was hugely better than the superficial articles published in the Salem Statesman Journal on this subject. You exposed the sad truth:

Salem's opportunity to have a world-class mixed-use sustainable development now almost certainly has been frittered away through the City Council's short-sighted kissing up to Simpson Hills, LLC -- which gets to build barely-green (if even that) conventional apartments on a site that could have featured cutting edge environment-friendly design.

My wife and I were investors in Sustainable Fairview Associates, LLC, the group which bought the property on which the Fairview Training Center was located.

We were involved in many meetings where plans for Sustainable Fairview were laid, ending in a Master Plan for the several hundred beautiful acres that seemed to guarantee that very high Green standards would have to be met by whoever developed the property.

Pringle Creek Community did just that after thirty-some acres were purchased from Sustainable Fairview Associates (SFA). By that time my wife and I were getting frustrated with the management of SFA, and I'd become a gadfly who annoyed many of the other investors. So after the Pringle Creek Community sale we sold our shares back to SFA for a decent profit.

I've remained interested in Sustainable Fairview though and continue to blog about the development. Just as I am now. 

Ah, what could have been... And now, won't be. Read the Salem Weekly piece and learn how Simpson HIlls was able to get permission from the City Council to modify the Sustainable Fairview Master Plan into a pathetic pale shadow of it's former vivid Greenness.

Deeply irritating.

One of our reasons for investing in Sustainable Fairview Associates was a realization that -- news flash! -- we're getting older. Someday, hopefully quite a few years off, our non-easy-care house is going to be too much for us to happily handle. My wife and I had envisioned living in either a smaller Sustainable Fairview detached home, or a condo of some sort. 

We liked the idea of living in a community of environmentally-minded people, with cars and roads downgraded in importance, being able to walk and bike around the development and surrounding neighborhoods, enjoying on-site amenities like a healthy restaurant, social center, coffee house, and such.

Now that dream seemingly has disappeared.

Simpson HIlls, LLC controls about half of the remaining Sustainable Fairview property, I believe. It now has free rein to build essentially conventional housing, with essentially conventional roads and parking lots, likely camoflaged by a thin veneer of minimalist "Earth Advantage" double-speak.

Salem Weekly reported what transpired at the City Council meeting where Simpson HIlls got its way:

Mayor Peterson:  “For us to sit here and say, ‘you’re going to have to build that to a gold standard’ is to say to that developer, ‘forget your bottom line, forget your funding, you’re going to have to do it this way.’”

And so Nanke’s second bid was dismissed.

Then, over Nanke’s and Bennett’s objections, the Council approved Simpson Hills’ plan.

The result?  A development that’s standard in an area that was supposed to be outstanding.   Because the city – from Planning Commission to planning staff to City Council – sold Fairview out.

True. The City of Salem sold out the dream of Sustainable Fairview.

But the way I see it, blame for the mediocrity that Sustainable Fairview will become (aside from Pringle Creek Community, which is doing things right) needs to be more broadly spread around to include...

-- Sustainable Fairview Associates, which had opportunities to sell the property to a genuinely Green developer back in the days when the housing market was booming and interest was pretty strong in the former Fairview site. SFA also failed to insure that Simpson Hills would have to abide by the Sustainable Fairview Master Plan when it developed the acreage that it bought from SFA. Why wasn't a clause to this effect included in the sales agreement?

-- Morningside Neighborhood Association, which represents the area adjacent to Sustainable Fairview. The board of the association initially strongly fought against the Simpson HIlls conventional apartments plan, but ended up voting narrowly (5-4, if I remember correctly from a news story) to endorse the mildly green'ified Simpson Hills proposal. Likely this encouraged the City Council to approve the so-called "refinements" to the Master Plan, which actually were "dismemberments."

-- Everyone who lives in and near Salem, including me, who passively puts up with never-ending mediocrity in our city. I've tried to point out a fresh path forward through my Strange Up Salem effort. However, by and large I sit on my butt and complain about Salem's lameness rather than doing something about it. 

I've theorized that a curse sits upon Salem, dooming us to be forever average while Portland, Corvallis, and Eugene (among other cooler, greener, more thriving Oregon cities) soar beyond us. This, though, is defeatist thinking. 

The Sustainable Fairview debacle, though, is just that: a defeat for Salem. There was an opportunity to make this property highly special. Now it'll become like almost everything is in Salem: acceptably OK. Nothing more.

Napoleon's Crêperie -- our new favorite downtown Salem restaurant

I made an excellent choice, though sadly belated."Sadly," because for months I've been walking by the expanded Napoleon's Crêperie & Gelateria in downtown Salem, Oregon (189 Liberty Street NE) and didn't know what I was missing. 

Never went in. Never ate there. Until last Thursday, during a visit by my daughter and granddaughter. We'd enjoyed the Riverfront Children's Museum and Carousel. I needed to refuel. "Crepes! We should get crepes!" I announced.

I could tell that my eatery suggestion was met with some skepticism. My wife is health conscious. So is my daughter. My granddaughter, like most kids, knows what she likes to eat. Also, what she doesn't. Crepes were a mystery to her. Mostly to me too, as I'd only had a few in my nearly crepe-less lifetime.

My erroneous intuition -- the main reason I hadn't eaten at Napoleon's before -- was that crepes were either a dessert, or fattening, or both. As you'll read below in my Urbanspoon review, this definitely wasn't true at Napoleon's.

Which is like Alice's Restaurant.

You can get whatever you want there. Meaning, if you want a main meal, crepes, pizzas, soups, salads, and other tasty substantial fare await. So does a thin crepe filled with fruit, or just butter and sugar, with whipped cream on the side, what my granddaughter and I happily ate.

My wife and I will be dining at Napoleon's frequently now. She's thinking of having a "Boomer" woman's discussion group that she started meet there for lunches, as the atmosphere is conducive for conversations.

Read on for more about why we like Napoleon's so much after two visits. Here's my Urbanspoon review:

Napoleon's is our new favorite place to eat in downtown Salem. First visit was two days ago, with my wife, daughter, and five year old granddaughter -- who live in Hollywood, so know what good eating is like. 

All of us said "Yum!" to the crepes.

Us three adults are health-minded. We ordered whole wheat crepes, and our server was marvelously flexible with our "could we substitute..." requests. Plus, the server didn't write anything down and still got our orders perfect. That's a sign of good service, as was her promptness and attention to us as we were eating.

The crepes are pleasingly tasty, yet not overly filling.

Each of us ate our entire crepe with relish, including my granddaughter -- who often is a picky eater. She loved her simple butter and sugar crepe. My wife and daughter had whole wheat spinach, mushroom, and brie/feta crepes. They liked them a lot. I had a whole wheat crepe with strawberries and whipped cream on the side. Good, good, good.

Last night my wife and I went back again for a dinner experience. It was equally enjoyable. Pleasant music, subdued elegant (for Salem) atmosphere, tasty food. We had an hour between two dance lessons, so were pleased to again find that we could clean our plates, yet not feel stuffed. Portion sizes are perfect for us. This time I had a whole wheat spinach, mushroom, and brie crepe. My wife and I shared a creative date/orange/lettuce/feta salad. Perfect for a warm summer night. 

Being a coffee addict, both times I had their regular coffee, which has a nice strong Italian taste. Last night the server suggested getting the "all you can drink" option: 25 cents more than a 16 ounce coffee, but you get unlimited refills. I had two refills plus half a cup more just to get my money's worth. 

All in all, Napoleon's is a great addition to the downtown Salem restaurant scene. The sort-of-new dining area they took over from a furniture place, or whatever it was, is tastefully decorated. Napoleon's could fit in on NW 23rd Street in Portland, my highest compliment.

My dog and I are dead last in the WillaMutt Strut. As planned.

We did it! Serena and I finished just where we wanted to in the Willamette Humane Society's 1.5K (.9 mile) WillaMutt Strut Fun Walk last Saturday in Salem's Riverfront Park. 

Last. 

Serena is twelve and a half years old. That's something like 87 in dog years. So Serena has slowed down. A lot. My wife took our younger dog, Zu Zu, on the 5K walk. I was pretty sure Serena couldn't handle three-plus miles in August heat. 

Hence, my plan was to let Serena do her usual walking thing -- which should guarantee that we'd end up in a distinctive position. At the end.

As the 1.5K walkers assembled at the starting line, there was some trash talking between the dogs. At least I assume this is what's going on here. Yo, big old dog! Us cute little fuzzy critters are going to kick your butt. And smell it, too, if we get the chance.

Even before we got to the "Start" line Serena and I had been passed by an overweight dog in a tutu. Excellent, I thought. Race plan is on target.

I felt even better a few yards down the Riverfront Park path, where Serena made her first stop-n'-sniff break (of which there were many). At the pace we were going, last place had to be ours.

Indeed, it didn't take long for a significant gap to appear between us and the main mass of walkers (can I call it the peloton?). 

Spending some time waving back at a WillaMutt Strut volunteer in a dog suit helped Serena and I further distance ourselves from the pack. In the direction we wanted: in the back.

My confidence in our race plan increased when Serena began to add stop-n'-pee to her stop-n'-sniff repertoire. I made no attempt to hurry her up, of course. 

Pleasingly, she found just as many sniffable bushes in the mid part of the walk as at the beginning. Last place was ours!

Almost.

Because there was one competitor I was most afraid of: an elderly woman in a wheetchair holding her dog on her lap, who was being pushed by a female companion. For most of the 1.5K they were comfortably ahead of us.

But on a section where the path doubled back on itself I looked across a stretch of grass and saw something that worried me. The elderly woman had gotten out of the wheelchair and was shuffling along behind it by holding onto the handles. 

Damn! I was worried that as slow as we were, she might be even slower. 

Fortunately, soon we got to a Humane Society volunteer who was overseeing the walk. I told her that my dog and I were hoping to get last place, so were concerned about a woman in a wheelchair who could upset our plan. 

"She's quite a ways ahead of you," the volunteer said. "No worries." Whew. Clear sailing walking ahead.

l spent the rest of the walk, which took us about forty minutes to go the .9 miles, a snail-like pace, thinking up witticisms I could yell at the crowd that I assumed awaited us at the finish line. Wouldn't there be a bunch of WillaMutt Strut participants and volunteers cheering on the stragglers? 

Actually, no. My marvelously witty witticisms went unuttered. There was absolutely nobody at the finish. Not a single witness to our last place triumph. 

I still documented Serena crossing the line.

Figured that my iPhone would have some sort of date/time attached to the photo in case someone else tried to claim our last place prize. No worries about that either; not only did no one try to claim our last place prize, there was no last place prize.

Except in my own mind.

And Serena's too, I bet, because to me she looks awfully proud crossing that finish line. We trained hard for the 1.5K. Spent months walking as slowly as possible on the roads and trails in our rural south Salem neighborhood.

All that not-so-hard work paid off. Last place in the WillaMutt Strut! Next year, we hope to defend our anti-championship. With Serena being thirteen and a half years old then, our chances are excellent.

Northwest only region of U.S. cooler than normal in 2012

This won't surprise Oregonians and Washingtonians bummed out over our cold, wet spring. Which has extended into summer. Snow was falling at pass levels recently, and it's freaking June!

Almost everywhere in the United States but the northwest, temperatures have been warmer than average in 2012. In many places, record-breaking warmer. Our relatives in the mid-west have been bragging for months about going swimming in 80 degree weather.

Climate Progress tells the tale.

Spring 2012 beat 1910, which had held the title for record warm spring, by a healthy margin of 2°F. No doubt much of this was driven by the massive heat wave that gripped the country during March, but unusual warmth continued during April and May, albeit not as intense. Such warming trends are consistent with both the influence of manmade global warming, particularly the prevalence of record warm nighttime temperatures, and natural variability has also favored warmer-than-average conditions so far this year. Studies show that as greenhouse gases continue to increase in the atmosphere, the odds of heat extremes are growing as well.

According to NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center, the spring of 2012 “was the culmination of the warmest March, third warmest April, and second warmest May. This marks the first time that all three months during the spring season ranked among the 10 warmest, since records began in 1895.”

Downtown Salem (Oregon) needs to lose some lanes

I'm writing this blog post in my favorite downtown Salem coffee house, the Beanery.

The atmosphere both inside and outside is pleasant, but in no way electric, energetic, exciting, enthusiastic, or any other "e" word I can think of to describe what downtown Salem could be, yet isn't.

That's Salem, the little engine that could, but hasn't.

On May 4, 1000 Friends of Oregon brought together a bunch of people to discuss what's right and wrong with downtown Salem. An overview of the meeting is interesting reading. I heartily agree with:

But local residents and businesspeople have a lot of reasonable complaints: downtown streets are wide, the lanes are many, and the traffic is aggressive by design. As long as the connective tissue between the historic blocks, the bookend public amenities, and the larger urban renewal area remains oriented to the automobile, Salem’s historic district and larger downtown will inevitably languish and suffer the fate of our shortsighted post-war transportation decisions.

...In Salem we heard talk of building a new Willamette River Crossing, saw the new Salem Conference Center, and learned about a recent push to allow drive-thru banks downtown. While it’s good for planners, citizens, and policy-makers to weigh decisions like these, what downtown Salem needs most is something much more obvious: a walkable and calm street network that compliments the textured historic buildings of its historic district.

After all, their builders didn't design them to be used and loved from the window of a Prius, but used and loved by shoppers, residents, and tenants (and their wallets). Slowing and narrowing the rivers of traffic lanes will connect the islands of great buildings that today sit there, waiting for the inevitable day when they realize their full potential once again.  

Astute observations. 

There's so much potential in downtown Salem. The historic buildings, trees, quaint alleys, diversity of small businesses, and proximity to the riverfront bode well for a downtown that's a lot more alive than the current semi-slumbering city center.

Compared to other vital downtowns I've visited, Salem -- as noted above -- is overly dominated by wide, busy, car-filled thoroughfares, such as Liberty and Commercial Streets. Getting from one side of a street to the other side is more difficult than it should be if Salem wants a downtown where people enjoy wandering around to various businesses and attractions.

I realize that Salem and Sisters, Oregon are very different cities in lots of ways. Size, street layout, atmosphere, etc. etc. Still, Salem could learn from how Sisters is improving its already pedestrian-friendly two-lane main street through downtown.

When visitors and residents feel that a town wants them to walk around and stay a while, as contrasted with feeling like a second-class citizen to cars, businesses in the area will benefit. 

Of course, there have to be good reasons for people to venture to downtown Salem. My three word advice is Strange It Up!, a concept which somebody told me was brought up at the 1000 Friends meeting about downtown Salem.

Brian, thanks for the blog.  So I attended this event downtown this afternoon put on by 1000 friends: http://www.friends.org/node/1423  Attendees included:  City councillor Chuck Bennett, [former] mayor Mike Swaim, along with Carole Smith and Eric Kittleson of the Salem Downtown Partnership.  Eric actually said we need to "strange it up"!  

So I thought you would appreciate that.

Absolutely. Made my day. Now, all we in Salem do is make strange it up more than words. 

Salem "cougar" is almost certainly a cat

Lock the doors! Keep children inside! Armor up your Chihuahuas! A cougar has been spotted in a south Salem residential area!

Except... the animal almost certainly is a cat, notwithstanding the uncritical acceptance of the cougar sighting by Statesman Journal reporter Dan Bender. (Note to Bender: "sighting" is when you see something; "siting," the word you used, is when something is positioned somewhere.)

This is a real cougar.

This is the "cougar" spotted lying on some groundcover during daytime in the backyard of a south Salem home. Comments on the KATU story are decidedly (and appropriately) skeptical about this animal being a cougar. Some samples:

Actually looking at the other pictures it looks a lot smaller than 50lbs. Id say 20. Fur is deceptive. I initially thought canada lynx, but it looks too small, and if it were a juvenile, its feet would be a lot bigger to indicate it would be a 55lb cat someday. This looks like a possible hybrid... 

Looks to me like a nice healthy house cat. Manx cross (short tail). House cat face. No tufts on ears (lynx), stripes and short tail (Bob cat cross maybe), really not very big as lynx or certainly not big enough for a full grown cougar .

Not a cougar... also doesn't look like it weighs 45 lbs or anything close... This cat has a gorgeous, thick fur coat, which would make it look larger... Ears look like a lynx, with the tufted tops... Tail's kind of long for a bobcat, but could be a cross, I guess... That face looks like a housecat.... I'll bet this is a hybrid of some kind... 

City folk are so funny! A cougar, female, can weigh from 64-141 lbs. and a male ranges from 115-220 lbs. This looks nothing like that, lol.

Just doesn't seem to look like a cougar. More like a Maine Coon cat or possibly a mix of some kind from a Bengal mix, Golden Cat mix, or something along that line.

My guess would be its a Savannah breed. They are a cross between a Serval and a domestic cat. Serval lineage would give it the short tail and spots and striped tail as well as the big pointed ears. Svannahs get pretty big and the thick fur could be a result of a Maine Coon in its heritage. They are expensive cats but if its enjoying being free then I wish it the best of luck.

Google Pixie-Bob images and you'll see cats that look a lot like this one. They seem to have a variety of tail lengths as far as I noted in the photos. This is NOT a cougar and while it bears a resemblance to a bobcat, the coloring is different and the tail is too long. It could be a domestic/bobcat cross as noted by others, but I think this is a large domestic kitty....who probably doesn't care a hoot about all the commotion it caused while merely trying to take a nap!

Back in 2005 I blogged about "Oregon cougar sighting really a kitty cat." Seven years later, it looks like the same mistake occurred. Which shows, as I noted in that earlier post, how ludicrous it is to base cougar management policies on reported sightings. 

Obviously many people can't tell the difference between a large house cat sunning itself, and a wild cougar. Both, of course, are essentially harmless to humans. (Well, actually I've been scratched by a cat many times, but never hurt in any way by a cougar.)

UPDATE: Yes, you read it here first. Beat the Statesman Journal newspaper by two days, which is reporting that the "cougar" is indeed a cat.

Experts determined that the animal spotted Friday in residential South Salem and was thought to be a cougar wasn’t one.

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife biologist reviewed photos of the animal and determined that the animal, which prompted alerts of public safety, was not a cougar.

Police said the photos might be of a Maine-Coon cat, a large domesticated cat that often weighs more than 20 pounds and is noticeably larger than a normal house cat, police said.

Crazy Shirts model spotted at Salem dog park!

OK, let's add "Aspiring" at the start of the title for this blog post.

Because right now I am not an official model of Crazy Shirts clothing. But after Crazy Shirts executives see today's Salem (Oregon) dog park photo shoot, I expect a modeling contract will be in the mail.

(One negative omen, though: Crazy Shirts seems to be age'ist in its current choice of clothing models. On the positive side, there's a dog in this photo of a 2012 photoshoot.)

My own photoshoot was spontaneously organized by my wife, who asked for my iPhone after I cajoled Family Dog #2, Zu Zu, to jump up next to me on a Minto Brown Dog Park bench.

"So cute," Laurel said. I assume she was talking about me, even though she was looking at Zu Zu.

Fortunately for my modeling career, I was wearing my Ugly Tuna Saloona hat, a Chile-Dyed Pepper Dragon t-shirt, and Chocolate-Dyed Canton Sweatpants -- all from Hawaii-based Crazy Shirts, which has become my favorite clothing source (and I'm saying that only partly because I want to kiss up to the Crazy Shirts staff who choose catalog models; I really do love their clothes).

The first photo has some energy to it. However, the vibe I get is of an irritated dog about to bite a guy who's trying to pat it. Probably should omit this one from my Crazy Shirts portfolio.

The second photo turned out better, aside from Zu Zu's butt being crammed into my armpit. On the plus side, Laurel was standing far enough away to prevent the Crazy Shirts' advertising department from clearly seeing how old I am.

An improvement. However, Zu Zu's tongue seems to be sticking out and she isn't exhibiting a high degree of adoring behavior to her owner canine caretaker.

Ah, a big dog smile. And a dog lovingly facing in my direction, subtly encouraged by my right hand pressing into Zu Zu's neck. This photo should put me over the top, Crazy Shirts modeling contract-wise.

The photoshoot ended with some canine backsliding. However, I look pretty damn good, in my utterly subjective opinion. I then grabbed the camera and...

Took a single photo of Laurel with Zu Zu. Sadly for her own modeling career, Laurel isn't wearing anything from Crazy Shirts. 

(And sadly for mine, I don't see "Model" as one of the available career opportunities on the Crazy Shirts web site.)

Hawaiian Airlines drops non-stop Portland-Maui flights, so we drop Hawaiian

Most likely, yesterday we took our last flight on Hawaiian Airlines. For about twenty years we've flown direct from Portland, Oregon to Maui. In January 2012 Hawaiian dropped non-stop Portland-Maui flights. 

So my wife and I are going to drop Hawaiian. We had lots of frequent flyer miles accumulated through our usually-annual flights to Maui, supplemented by our habitual use of a Hawaiian Airlines VISA card, which gave us one mile for every dollar charged.

This year we used up almost all of our frequent flyer miles to buy "free" tickets for a flight to Maui that required a plane change in Honolulu. Ugh. Never again.

From now on we'll fly Alaska Airlines' non-stop to Maui from Portland. And cancel our Hawaiian VISA card. Hawaiian Airlines made a bad business decision. 

Have you enjoyed direct flights from Maui to Portland on Hawaiian Airlines? That service is about to end. Beginning mid-January, you will need to make connecting flights through Honolulu.

This move is bad for Maui tourism. Nonstop service is what attracts visitors to the Neighbor Islands. With fewer options for direct flights, tourists who understand the consequences of connecting flights will opt for a different airline or a different locale to visit.

The Portland flights always seem full, but if statistics show otherwise, why drop the number of days for the direct service to zero? We understand that difficult business decisions sometimes need to be made, but we don't understand the wisdom of deserting an existing market entirely.

Yesterday we asked a Hawaiian Airlines employee why the non-stop flight was cancelled.

"I have no idea," we were told. "The company doesn't tell us employees anything. The direct flights were almost always full. People liked them. Now we're losing business travelers who can't get to Maui early enough to do a full day's work. You should write Hawaiian and complain."

For sure. I'm going to.

Maybe it won't make any difference, but the more people who gripe about losing the non-stop Portland to Maui flight, the more Hawaiian Airlines will realize that whoever dreamed up this stupid move made a bad decision.

From a Facebook page, I learned that Mahalo@HawaiianAir.com is an email address to send complaints to. And the above-quoted letter from The Maui News says, "Leona Duarte at the airline is accepting email from affected travelers/businesses, Leona.Duarte@HawaiianAir.com" So I'm going to send my message to both email addresses.

I'm going to let Hawaiian Airlines know that it was much less enjoyable to fly to Maui through Honolulu. Yesterday my wife and I left Maui pretty much on schedule at 12:45 pm. Our flight to Portland left Honolulu about twenty minutes late, around 3:00 pm. 

So we spent over two hours getting farther away from Portland. Which meant that by the time we got our bags and hopped on the Park N' Fly shuttle, it was after midnight. Living as we do in south Salem, we didn't get home until close to 2:00 am. 

Not fun. Not compared to the non-stop Portland-Maui flights that we and so many others had come to like so much.

The Hawaiian Airlines employee we talked with had the same attitude as I did: "It just isn't right that now a lot more Oregonians are going to be flying on Alaska Airlines to Maui. Getting to Hawaii should be on Hawaiian Airlines."

I agreed. Wholeheartedly.

My wife and I love the service and island-atmosphere on Hawaiian. More than that though, we love not wasting hours of our time making an unnecessary stop in Honolulu -- which is an unattractive, poorly designed airport with horrible eating options for health-minded vegetarians like us. 

Hawaiian Airlines likely is about to feel the full impact of disgruntled formerly loyal customers. As mentioned above, we've now used up almost all of our frequent flyer miles. From now on, we'll use Alaska Airlines for our annual vacations on Maui.

Good bye, Hawaiian. We've enjoyed your company for several decades. But your inexplicable decision to drop all direct flights to Maui from Portland is causing us to embrace Alaska. Change your ways, and we'll probably come back into your arms wings.

Not if you continue to make us fly through Honolulu, though.

1000 Friends of Oregon urges Salem to preserve Sustainable Fairview

Today the Salem City Council has a choice to make: preserve cutting-edge Green zoning requirements for the highly touted Sustainable Fairview mixed use development, or show once again why Oregon's capital deserves it's nickname, "So-lame."

I'm not wildly optimistic, given the Salem Planning Commission's disappointing go-ahead to Simpson Hills, LLC that would allow it to build a bunch of average apartments on what should be an exceptional piece of property.

But if the City Council listens to those in the know, as opposed to those with the biggest short-term profit motive, it will stick with the Sustainable Fairview Master Plan.

1000 Friends of Oregon urges, "Salem Should Keep Sustainable Fairview VIsion Intact."

A flawed proposal can sink a whole vision. That's the case in Salem, where a proposed multifamily housing development seeks to sidestep an innovative, sustainable plan that local residents developed several years ago. The proposal will soon go before City Council, and local advocates are urging the Council to stick to the vision already adopted.

When the City of Salem adopted the visionary Fairview Master Plan in 2005, it was the product of a community with big ideas. It proposed a livable, sustainable future that garnered praise locally and around the country for its creative and productive reuse of a unique large parcel in the middle of a city. “Salem may get used to seeing its name on magazine covers for some time,” crowed the Statesman-Journal editorial board at the time.

Just seven years later, the City has a decision to make: whether to keep to the vision and the potential of that citizen-created plan, or to follow a bland path that it will undoubtedly later regret. 1000 Friends of Oregon hopes the City will choose to stay on the course its citizens so boldly laid in the Fairview Master Plan.

...The nearby Pringle Creek Community, on a different portion of the Fairview site, is a faithful expression of that vision, and has been rightly praised for its accomplishments. But Simpson Hills, citing insufficiently proven constraints on its portion of the site, claims that many of these same principles should be set aside to build utterly indistinctive apartment housing that might be seen anywhere in the country.

Local neighborhood associations, businesspeople, and advocates reject the idea that Salem should embrace blandness and walk away from the community’s vision expressed in the Fairview Master Plan. 1000 Friends of Oregon agrees.

Quality matters. This site can only be developed once. If Salem gets this right, it will set the tone for its own future as a livable and sustainable place, and those magazine covers will keep coming, as will creative and talented residents who will help the city’s economy and culture thrive.

And Salem Breakfast on Bikes has another good overview of what's wrong with the Simpson HIlls, LLC attempt to de-Green Sustainable Fairview.

On Monday, in an appeal on a Planning Commission decision, Council returns to the matter of the third Fairview refinement plan. (For background and analysis see here, here, and here.) The lead images from the plans, though, tell quite a bit of the story in a visual shorthand. The refinement plan strays significantly from the Master Plan and Council will have to decide how much straying should be permitted and, even, whether to construe the refinement plan as "straying."