HinesSight

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 [email protected]

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).

Praise be to obsessively committed citizen activists

A few weeks back I was asked by a reporter, "Do you think you're going to make a difference?"

Then we talked about why I've been so intensely focused on trying to save the last two beautiful US Bank trees in downtown Salem (three have been cut down for no good reason; there is even less reason than that to kill the remaining trees). 

I didn't get much of a chance to answer that first question, other than to say "Sure."

After spending a few hours yesterday listening to Thom Hartmann, a progressive radio talk show host and author, speak here in Salem, I'm motivated to spend some blog time pondering why us citizen activists do what we do.

Hartmann talked quite a bit about Move to Amend, an effort to amend the United States Constitution to affirm that money is not speech, and that human beings, not corporations, are persons entitled to constitutional rights.

Local Move to Amend folks had tables set up in the Grand Theatre lobby. They're working hard to get Oregon's state legislature to be the second, after Vermont's, to support Move to Amend. 

That's a long way from passing a constitutional amendment. But praise be, from the deepest recesses of my non-religious heart, to activists who work so long, so hard, so diligently, so quixotically -- tilting at windmills that seemingly are next to impossible to attack with any hope of success.

Until that "seemingly" is shown to be false. And the windmills crumble after countless lance strikes.

Nothing is impossible for the obsessively crazed activist who refuses to stop fighting for his or her cause until the last drop of determination is drained from their being. Just look at how resistance to gay marriage is finally crumbling after so many years of apparently fruitless efforts.

As Barry Goldwater famously said, "Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. And moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue." We all remember the Chinese "Tank Man."

Did he have any chance against those tanks? No. Did he feel that he had no choice but to do what he did? Almost surely, yes. Did he make a difference? Yes, yes, yes!

After all, I'm inspired and energized by him. So are countless others. I hope he's still alive. But if he's not, if he was killed by the Chinese authorities, he lived as we all should: bravely, whole-heartedly, standing tall for truth, liberty, and justice in the face of oppressive power.

I can give reasons for why I've spent so much time, energy, and money fighting for causes that seemingly have little chance of success. However, I don't believe citizen activism can be explained. 

It is felt, not thought. Experienced, not a subject of exposition (though, yeah, as a blogger I guess I'm doing just that). Much more of an ungraspable energy than a solid analyzable entity.

I tilt at windmills, and sometimes succeed in stopping their turning, because I'm incapable of doing anything else. I bet most citizen activists feel the same. Artists make art because artistry drives them. Activists make waves because a calm sea of injustice drives them to stir things up.

Often, when I'm trying to right some unrightable wrong, I wonder whether I'd be happier spending my retired days doing something more pleasant. It doesn't take me long to realize, no, I wouldn't. Pleasantness is great, but I need more to be truly happy.

The rest of the lyrics to Impossible Dream, as familiar as they may be, express what lies at the heart of a citizen activist better than any other words I could end this post with.

It isn't success that an activist truly yearns for, but the feeling that at the end of the long day called Life, one's eyes can close in peace -- having been focused on the pursuit of what really matters, even if the quarry remained just out of reach.

DON QUIXOTE 
It is the mission of each true knight... 
His duty... nay, his privilege! 
To dream the impossible dream, 
To fight the unbeatable foe, 
To bear with unbearable sorrow 
To run where the brave dare not go; 
To right the unrightable wrong. 

To love, pure and chaste, from afar, 
To try, when your arms are too weary, 
To reach the unreachable star! 

This is my Quest to follow that star, 
No matter how hopeless, no matter how far, 
To fight for the right 
Without question or pause, 
To be willing to march into hell 
For a heavenly cause! 

And I know, if I'll only be true 
To this glorious Quest, 
That my heart will lie peaceful and calm 
When I'm laid to my rest. 

And the world will be better for this, 
That one man, scorned and covered with scars, 
Still strove, with his last ounce of courage, 
To reach the unreachable stars!

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)

Senate filibuster rule sucks -- it killed expanded gun background checks

It's frustrating to see headlines like, "Senate fails to pass gun control legislation." Not true. The expanded background checks bill was supported 54-46, a clear majority.

Only problem is, under the Senate's stupid filibuster rules and current Republican intransigence, it takes 60 votes -- a supermajority -- to do anything substantial.

So bills "fail" when they really "passed." Why Democrats put up with this crap is beyond me.

If Republicans were in control of the Senate and White House, and Democrats were preventing presidential nominees from even being voted on, along with bottling up almost every piece of important legislation by filibustering, I'm pretty damn sure severe limits on the filibuster would have been passed long ago.

But weenie Democrats in the Senate apparently prefer to preserve the illusion of belonging to the "world's greatest deliberative body" (a huge lie), than do what needs to be done to get the Senate doing the people's business, like it should be.

Ezra Klein talked about this in "The gun bill failed because the Senate is wildly undemocratic."

The gun vote didn’t fail because a couple of red-state Democrats bolted, or even because too many senators are afraid of the National Rifle Association, or even because Sen. Pat Toomey couldn’t bring along more Republicans.

Those factors help explain why the gun vote didn’t clear the extraordinary bar set for it to succeed. But they’re not the main reason it failed.

The gun vote failed because of the way the Senate is designed. It failed because the Senate wildly overrepresents small, rural states and, on top of that, requires a 60-vote supermajority to pass most pieces of legislation.

The Manchin-Toomey bill received 54 aye votes and 46 nay votes. That is to say, a solid majority of senators voted for it. In most legislative bodies around the world, that would have been enough. But it wasn’t a sufficient supermajority for the U.S. Senate.

...It’s easy to question the strategies of the gun bill’s architects, but the truth is they compromised repeatedly, sought support widely and openly, worked hard to address criticisms and allay concerns, and did everything in their power to marshal public opinion on their behalf. They did what they were supposed to do.

But then the Senate did what it is built to do. It took a bill supported by most Americans and killed it because it was intensely opposed by a minority who disproportionately live in small, rural states.

Oregon first state to decriminalize marijuana. We're green! (in many ways)

When I came across this map that shows the spread of liberalized marijuana laws in the United States, the first state that turned light green leapt out at me. 

Oregon! (click on image to activate; or check out the Atlantic Wire story that has the map).

Indeed, Wikipedia confirms that the year I moved here, 1973, was when Oregon kicked off the national trend of decriminalizing and, recently, legalizing recreational marijiuana. In addition, a bunch of states (including Oregon) have OK'd medical marijuana for certain conditions. 

Today the Oregon state Senate passed a bill that would let people with post-traumatic stress disorder get medical marijuana cards. The ignorance of some Republican legislators about medicinal marijuana is shown in this quote from the story.

Sen. Alan Olsen, R-Canby, said while he understands the responsibility to help people with this disorder he remains skeptical about whether marijuana should be used as medicine for PTSD.

“You know you could sit down with a bottle of Jack Daniels and listen to Charlie Daniels and probably get the same effect,” Olsen, a former narcotics investigator, told lawmakers.

I don't know how much marijuana you use, Sen. Olsen, but whatever the quantity is, you need to toke up more.

Obviously you haven't experienced the difference between drinking a bunch of toxic alcohol, and ingesting a natural herb whose active ingredient triggers brain receptors, some of which reduce pain (along with increasing pleasure, and without those nasty whiskey side effects.)

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: [email protected] 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.)

Nature shows that perceptions are more lively than ideas

Ah, my first blog post title inspired by David Hume, a philosopher whom I've only admired through the admiration of others, not directly through his writings.

Until recently.

Today I read Hume's ideas about the liveliness of sensual, emotional, and willful "impressions," which he contrasts with less lively "ideas." 

Rings true to me.

I just got back from a late afternoon dog walk. The two family canines and I meandered along a path that leads across a creek, through some woods, and around a small lake. I always feel restored and rejuvenated when I go on this walk.

Because I'm focused mainly on sights and sounds, not thoughts and concepts. During much of the day my head is filled with a mixture of impressions and ideas that tilts more toward the "monkey mind" ideational side.

Hard to resist in our 21st century connected age.

The daily newspapers (we subscribe to both the Salem and Portland papers), Internet news, blog postings, Twitter feed, Facebook timeline, political talk on satellite radio -- all of this stimulates thoughts of irritation, worry, hope, satisfaction, impatience, concern, and other ideations. 

I'm not being affected by what is right around me.

I'm getting signals from distant corners of the globe, telling me about stuff ("Immigration reform on Congress agenda this week!" "South Dakota passes stringent anti-abortion laws!" etc, etc, etc, etc.) that I'd be clueless about if all I knew was what my senses and emotions told me.

Now this wouldn't be how I'd want to live, clueless of what is happening in the world beyond my immediate surroundings.

But my daily dog walk reminds me of how unnatural so much of modern culture is, how it distances us from what evolution has attuned us to pay attention to (rustling in the brush, cries of birds flying overhead, fresh sprouts of vegetation springing up), and how important it is to focus on lively perceptions instead of deadening ideas.

On today's walk I looked down more than I ususally do.

I wanted to notice little things more than big things. Rather than gazing at the large firs and oaks beside the trail, I paid attention to the light green new-growth tendrils of ferns, tiny flowers in April bloom, the look and feel of roots that cross the path.

I didn't get any astounding insights. However, I enjoyed many sights that had largely escaped my notice on previous dog walks where the goings-on inside my head had occupied a larger share of my attention.

The here-and-now and there-and-then are both real, albeit in different ways. Attending to each is part of being human. Hume, though, reminds us that life is best lived as fully alive as possible.

Ideas aren't nearly as enlivening as perceptions.

By the term impression, then, I mean all our more lively perceptions, when we hear, or see, or feel, or love, or hate, or desire, or will. And impressions are distinguished from ideas, which are the less lively perceptions, of which we are conscious, when we reflect on any of those sensations or movements above mentioned.

...Nothing, at first view, may seem more unbounded that the thought of man, which not only escapes all human power and authority, but is not even restrained within the limits of nature and reality.

To form monsters, and join incongruous shapes and appearances, costs the imagination no more trouble than to conceive the most natural and familiar objects.

And while the body is confined to one planet, along which it creeps with pain and difficulty; the thought can in an instant transport us into the most distant regions of the universe; or even beyond the universe, into the unbounded chaos, where nature is supposed to lie in total confusion.

...In short, all the materials of thinking are derived either from our outward or inward sentiment: the mixture and composition of these belongs alone to the mind and will. Or, to express myself in philosophical language, all our ideas or more feeble perceptions are copies of our impressions or more lively ones.

There's nothing wrong with copies. But for a good part of the day, we should be occupied with originals. Look! They're all around you! And also... directly you.

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.)

Leave cougars alone, Oregon legislators. Kill HB 2624 instead.

Here we go again. Another session of the Oregon legislature; another misguided attempt to undo the voter's banning (twice!) of using dogs to hunt cougars.

And once again, legislation in search of a problem to justify it. House Bill 2624, introduced by Rep. Brian Clem of Salem, would let counties out of the statewide ban if voters in a county approved this.

Yet nobody has ever been killed by a cougar in Oregon. Cougar complaints are declining. 

Opponents called the bills unnecessary because complaints of cougar encounters are down while cougar kills are up, according to state statistics. They said the bills would undo the will of voters, and they questioned the state's ability to count cougars accurately.

Scott Beckstead, Oregon director of the Humane Society of the United States came armed with data from the state that show a steep decline in the number of cougar complaints, from a high of 1,072 in 1999, to 287 in 2012. Over the same period, the data show, the number of cougars killed by hunters has risen from 157 to 242.

Voters didn't bar cougar and bear hunting, Beckstead noted. And they allowed the continued use of dogs to hunt problem or dangerous animals, he said.

"These bills go far beyond that," Beckstead said. "They allow the use of dogs and bait for sport. The voters of Oregon have said they don't want that."

Cougars benefit Oregon's environment. They are part of the balance of nature. They cause very few problems for humans. People are hugely more dangerous to people. (See here, here, here, and here.)

As I said in a previous post:

Pop quiz: how many people have been killed by a cougar in Oregon? Is it (a) 126, (b) 18, or (c) none.

From all the hysteria over "managing" the cougar population (which really means needlessly killing them), you'd think the answer would be greater than zero. But it isn't.

No one has ever been killed by a cougar in Oregon. Many people have been killed by hunters. So if we're really concerned about protecting human life, there should be a thinning of the ranks of hunters, not of cougars.

Irrational hysteria is the only reason this bill has been introduced. My wife and I live around cougars. I've walked by fresh cougar deer kills. I frequently take walks at night in woods frequented by cougars. I'm not afraid of cougars.

Hopefully legislators will become similarly educated about these valuable top predators before they vote on HB 2624. Just as wolf management shouldn't be based on "big bad wolf" fairy tales, neither should cougar management.

Cougars can't contact Oregon legislators. But you can. Speak for them. Prevent needless killing of these marvelous animals. Predator Defense tells you how to do it. Click on that link. Now.

Even though an April 2 public hearing already has been held, legislators on the Oregon House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee need to hear that people don't want the ban on hunting cougars with dogs, and bears with bait, to be overturned. 

Their email addresses are here.

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. 

Oregon should restrict those who want to restrict abortions

The crazier conservative-leaning states become, the happier I am to be an Oregonian.

My state isn't perfect, that's for sure, but by and large it hits the right balance when it comes to personal freedom and social responsibility.

Case in point: Oregon is the only state that hasn't limited a woman's access to abortion services. Repeat, only state.

This chart makes my green, moist, fern-infested heart beat with pride (I live in western Oregon; eastern Oregon has a different climate).

There Oregon is, way down at the bottom, showing zero on the type of abortion restrictions. Take that, Washington state -- which has one type of restriction. You've gotten legal gay marriage and marijuana before us, but at least we win on this personal freedom front.

Let's not rest content, though.

I was pleased to read today that the Oregon legislature is considering SB 490, which would require so-called "crisis pregnancy centers" (they provide no health services and promulgate false information about abortion) to be up-front about what their so-called "services" are, and to keep personal medical information private.

Among those testifying in support of Senate Bill 490 was Dr. Jim Lace, a Salem pediatrician and legislative chairman of the Oregon Medical Association. He said crisis pregnancy centers often provide only over-the-counter pregnancy tests and ultrasound tests, and generally are not staffed by medical professionals.

He said such centers often advise women that abortion causes breast cancer and future infertility, or that condoms do not prevent pregnancy or sexually transmitted diseases.

“These claims are not supported by peer-reviewed medical research and lack any disclaimer or notification to this effect, thus limiting the woman’s choice and jeopardizing her health and safety,” Lace said to the Senate Health Care and Human Services Committee.

He also said that unlike medical professionals, such centers are not bound by federal requirements for confidentiality of personal medical information.

SB 490 is an excellent idea. I hope it passes. It's long past time to give those who want to meddle in women's health care decisions a taste of their own medicine. 

These "crisis pregnancy centers" want to tell pregnant women what to do. So let's make sure that they honestly tell these women what they really are offering.

SB 490 requires that notices be prominently posted which describe whether the center provides each of the following:

(a) Contraceptive drugs or devices that are approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration;

(b) An on-site consultation with a [medical] practitioner listed in subsection (2)(b)(A) of this section;

(c) Adoption services or referral for adoption services; and

(d) Abortion services or referral for abortion services.

These notices would make clear to anyone who walks in that this really isn't a "crisis pregnancy center." It is a biased, limited, judgmental, moralistic anti-abortion center whose core, if not sole, purpose is to talk women into having a baby -- regardless of whether this is what the woman wants, or is in her best interest.

These anti-choice fanatics don't provide a wide range of pregnancy services. Yet women can easily be fooled into believing that they do. SB 490 would make it much more difficult to pass off an anti-abortion center as a "crisis pregnancy center."

Let's restrict the ability of those who want to restrict the ability of Oregon women to freely choose what to do when they become pregnant. Pass SB 490.