HinesSight

Twerking videos to clue in the clueless

I am hugely proud that my wife and I watched the recent MTV Video Music Awards. We are hip, with-it, cool seniors (both 64 years old) who appreciate the youthful side of life.

Like Miley Cyrus's uninhibited tongue-protruding booty-shaking performance at the VMA's. I liked Lady Gaga more, but we were impressed with how fully Miley has left behind her clean-cut Hannah Montana days.

Miley is on the right; Gaga on the left.

Both demonstrated a marvelous fact of modern culture: it is totally fine for females to strip almost naked and gyrate on national TV, but men must preserve their clothed dignity, by and large. I'm fine with this; my feminista wife, Laurel, not so much.

Our with-it'ness was not complete, though.

When I read stories about Miley's performance, I kept seeing references to her twerking. I was clueless about what this word meant. Laurel was also. We did correctly guess that it must have something to with either tongues or hips.

A bit of You Tube searching revealed the truth in the form of a "how to" video that has amassed 13,300,000 views. Good to know that people know what is important to learn in life.

 

I felt like I had the moves down in just a minute or so of practice. However, Laurel scoffed at my twerking. "Your butt is barely moving," she told me. I defensively argued back that Wikipedia says twerking usually is done by women (for obvious reasons).

 

This video convinced me that Wikipedia is absolutely on target. Though she does not win the booty-shaking competition, the blonde girl puts her heart butt into it at minutes 2 and 4 of the video. 

 

Each of the competitors puts Miley Cyrus to twerking shame. I had never seen her official "We Can't Stop" video. Spending three and a half minutes of my life watching it, I had difficulty thinking of any other 210 seconds I've experienced that was more painful. Maybe a root canal.

As an alternative, I recommend the video below to Miley Cyrus twerking fans. It is silent, probably for copyright reasons. But it appropriately focuses on the only redeeming quality of the "We Can't Stop" video: her ass.

 

Statesman Journal loses Pringle Square story comments. Conspiracy theory time!

Conspiracy theories are much more fun than ordinary explanations for screw-ups.

So I was disappointed when Michael Rose, the reporter who wrote a Statesman Journal story about the Pringle Square development ("Riverfront access issue draws fierce debate"), emailed me after I asked him why the several dozen online comments on this story had disappeared.

I checked with the IT people and was told that “human error” caused the comments to vanish. They weren’t intentionally deleted.

Come on... that's no fun. I much prefer other explanations, like:

-- Larry Tokarski used his magical real estate developer powers to make the mostly critical comments about Pringle Square go "poof."

-- The Salem Chamber of Commerce has finally gained direct control over Statesman Journal news and editorial content, rather than just indirect control.

-- The five City Councillors who voted last Monday to give Mountain West Investment a sweetheart tax exemption have contracted with Edward Snowden to delete all negative Internet postings about Pringle Square.

There's still conspiracy theory hope, though. So far as I can tell, the missing comments haven't been restored, notwithstanding this comment from SJ staff on the above-linked version of the story.

-- Yesterday afternoon we corrected the category of this story so that it showed up on our News section front. When we did that, the comments in the previous category unintentionally disappeared. However, they weren't deleted. You can see them here: http://stjr.nl/1dr94Hj — Amy Read, Digital producer

Well, when you follow that link, you end up back at the story that doesn't have the original comments. But, hey, some of the new comments have that entertaining conspiracy theory angle.

-- Statesman-Journal - What happened to all of the posts on this subject article? Do you have a reason for deleting them all? Why bother having a blog, if you remove the notes?

-- I did notice Pringle Square advertised a lot recently on this web site, maybe they trashed our comments because they did not want to offend an advertiser (who pays a lot better than you or me)

When the 30-plus (if I recall the number correctly) comments disappeared, mine was one of the three that remained. Naturally my own personal conspiracy theory was, "The SJ staff decided to leave up only the most brilliant, cogent, persuasive comments." 

[Update: Just noticed a testy blog post about Pringle Square opposition from Dick Hughes. So now we know: It was Hughes! That computer genius deleted the comments without Statesman Journal IT staff having a clue!]

Here's my comment, still visible for the moment on an alternative version of the story:

Mountain West Investment had an incoherent argument: (1) We really, really need a tax break to make this development viable, along with (2) Demand for downtown multi-family housing is really, really strong, so we're going to be a great success.

Huh? Talking out of both sides of the developer's mouth. Since they dissembled on this issue, there's little doubt that Pringle Square would do just fine with access through another route than the Carousel parking lot. 

Hopefully the Council won't be taken in by the threats of "we won't do this project if you don't turn over part of Riverfront Park to us." Given how much money they expect to make, from the testimony this evening, that's an empty threat.

My favorite developer quote: a consultant who said "I care a lot about the safety of children." Gee, that's nice. Thanks for stating the obvious. Assume you like kittens and puppies also.

Flaws of Pringle Square pointed out at Salem City Council meeting

Last night the Salem City Council heard from lots of people concerned about the proposed Pringle Square development on the downtown riverfront. 

I'm glad to see that the online Statesman Journal story about the public hearing has been modified to say:

The issue attracted a rare standing room only crowd to the council chambers. About 30 people signed up to testify at a public hearing, with roughly an equal mix of supporters and opponents of the development plan. Some of the supporters were affiliated with the developer.

The last sentence didn't appear in the print edition. Should have. Not only were "some" of the supporters affiliated with the developer, most were.

A decided majority of ordinary citizens in attendance opposed the plan to convert part of Riverfront Park into an access road to the Pringle Square apartments, and allow large fire trucks to zoom through the heavily-used park if a train blocks that road.

I watched the nearly four-hour hearing online via CCTV, paying as much attention as I could while doing other stuff on my computer. My wife couldn't believe that I spent so much of my senior citizen time on this. 

Well, I figure this was a yin and yang balancing for the 2 1/2 hours of my life that went into watching the MTV Video Music Awards the night before. Lady Gaga and Miley Cyrus definitely were more alluring, but I'm politically geeky enough to find hours of public testimony on a highly controversial subject entertaining. 

I'm opposed to letting Mountain West Investment, the Pringle Square developers, take over part of Riverfront Park. Still, I tried to watch the City Council meeting with as open a mind as possible. A lot of interesting stuff went on last night. 

I'll limit myself to ten day-after "takeaways." 

(1) The Pringle Square development is in more trouble than I expected. A vote to give their apartments an unnecessary tax break squeaked through on a 5-4 vote, with Councillor Thomas providing the rather surprising deciding "yes." (Her reasons for doing so were incoherent, leading me to suspect that arm-twisting pressure was put on her by the usual gang of Chamber of Commerce suspects). And a decision on the access road was put off until September 9, at the earliest.

(2) Mountain West Investment deserves all the trouble it is getting. The heavy-handed, sanctimonious, our-way-or-the-highway attitude of Pringle Square development staff was highly irritating. Wise developers would have reached out to skeptics in the Salem community rather than pushing opponents away. Intense frontstage (ads in Statesman Journal) and backstage (power structure schmoozing) lobbying has hurt Mountain West more than it has helped. Developer bullies should expect to get push-back.

(3) Salem residents love their Riverfront Park and Carousel. l was moved by the people who spoke about the many years of volunteer work that went into making Riverfront Park and the Carousel the wonderful places they are today. These treasures have to be protected, they said. Most were in favor of re-developing the old Boise Cascade property -- just not at the expense of public amenities that the private Pringle Square developers have no right to.

(4) Alternative access routes exist. A man with, I recall, 35 years of state Department of Transportation experience spoke persuasively about how other ways to access the west side of the railroad tracks are eminently feasible. Yet for some reason Mountain West Investment is fixated on using the current Carousel parking lot. This indicates how little the Pringle Square developers have been listening to the public. They need to spend less time lobbying and more time listening.

(5) Many hurdles are in the way of granting Riverfront Park access. You can read about these hurdles in a previous blog post. For example, the National Park Service Land and Water Conservation Fund manual (federal dollars were used to create Riverfront Park) describes a mind-numbingly complex process for requesting conversion of public land to a private use. As Public Works director Peter Fernandez noted at the Council meeting, this process is more involved if the conversion is "controversial." For sure, this one is. Good luck with that, Mountain West Investment. You'll be entering a legal and public comment hornet's nest.

(6) Pringle Square developers contradicted themselves. Hard to tell whether the parade of Mountain West Investment staff and consultants had coordinated their talking points. Seemed like two key aspects of their message were contradictory: (1) We really, really need the 10 year tax break and other favors to make this development happen; (2) We really, really are convinced there is a strong demand for multi-family rental housing in the downtown area, with vacancies overall being under 3%. 

Huh? Hard to understand how five City Councillors (Clem, Bednarz, Nanke, Clausen, Thomas) were persuaded to hand over hundreds of thousands of tax dollars to the developers, given the slam-dunk success Mountain West Investment is forecasting. 

(7) West Salem/Front Street commuters aren't happy with the parking lot plan. Here's something strange: the City of Salem is dead set on building an unwanted, unneeded, and unpaid for Third Bridge, which supposedly would relieve traffic congestion surrounding the current two bridges. However, several people testified that the Carousel parking lot light/interesection already is a rush hour nightmare area. Adding considerably more cars going into and out of this intersection is going to make congestion there much worse. 

(8) Parents aren't thrilled with changing the Carousel parking lot. As noted before, the Pringle Square developers want to use some of the Carousel parking lot for a private road to their apartments. An island in the middle of the lot will be eliminated, and most of the current normal-sized spaces will become compact spaces. One Mountain West Investment consultant found it necessary to say, "I care a lot about the safety of children." Well, I hope so. Many people who testified last night weren't reassured by the oft-repeated contention of the developers that running a private road to the apartment complex right by the Carousel parking lot won't put children at additional risk. 

(9) Mayor Anna Peterson did a good job running the super-lengthy meeting. I'm often critical of Mayor Peterson for her stands on issues that I disagree with (cutting down the US Bank trees, building a Third Bridge, installing parking meters in downtown Salem). But, damn, she has way more meeting staying-power than I do. I was getting bored, cranky, and tired just sitting on a kitchen stool, watching the proceedings on a CCTV browser screen while being able to eat, drink, walk around, do other stuff, and mutter to myself about idiotic testimony. Peterson ran the five-hour meeting gracefully, courteously, and pretty much even-handedly. Kudos to her.

(10) Peterson and Jason Tokarski went at it in an interesting fashion. Near the end of the long Council meeting, after 11:15 pm, I believe, Mayor Peterson and Mountain West's Jason Tokarski got into an interchange that I didn't totally understand, yet enjoyed a lot. After Tokarski talked about the strong demand for rentals in downtown Salem, Peterson asked how many acres of the development Mountain West was offering to the City in exchange for the Carousel parking lot access. She knew the answer, I'm quite sure. "None," Tokarski said. He added that this was on the table at one point, but the Pringle Square developers decided they couldn't give up any land. I got the feeling a lot more was going on here than was being uttered verbally. 

Written public comments still can be submitted about the Carousel parking lot access plan. So before September 9 tell the City Council how you feel about the plan to give away part of Riverfront Park to a private developer: [email protected]

Lastly... I've been wondering how Mountain West Investment plans to get equipment and supplies in to build the Pringle Square apartments. Even to build the access road from the Carousel parking lot -- how will that happen if there is no other way to get to the property? Hard to believe road building would start from the parking lot, though this might be possible. 

I suspect access is possible from the south end of the property, a point quite a few people made at last night's hearing.

Pringle Square developer poised to take some of Riverfront Park

Ah, City of Salem. The games you play.

From what I can tell, an all-too-familiar strategy is being played out with Pringle Square's two-fold request that will be decided at next Monday's City Council meeting:

(1) Give a 10 year property tax break to this private development.
(2) Give up part of RIverfront Park for a road to this private development.

This is added on to the absurd desire to put a Marquis nursing home on the Pringle Square property, even though City staff found that a nursing home isn't an allowed use in the South Waterfront Mixed-Use zone, and Marquis isn't entitled to get a tax break for the nursing home under the ridiculous notion that beds in a short-term rehab facility are the same as "multi-family housing."

So what do you think? Will the Mayor and City Council stand up for the public interest over private interests? Here's what I think. 

They should. But they probably won't. 

Being the proud possessor of a thick stack of public records request documents related to the atrocious decision by Public Works Director Peter Fernandez to allow US Bank to cut down five downtown trees for no good reason, I can confidently say that politics trumped facts and the law in that instance.

City staff and the City's own Shade Tree Advisory committee, along with every citizen who testified on the issue, said that the trees should be pruned, not cut down. At first Fernandez himself said that he would deny US Bank's tree removal application.

Then the politicking kicked in. Lobbying. End runs around open, transparent public process. Attempts to keep citizens from being able to appeal an utterly appealable bad decision.

I haven't followed the Pringle Square planning in as much detail. But I can feel the same pressure to ignore facts and the law in favor of special interest deal-making. Consider:

Yesterday an online story appeared on the Statesman Journal web site. Reporter Anna Staver wrote "Salem city staff decline to make recommendation on apartment complex at Riverfront Park."

Salem City staff have made the unusual move of avoiding a recommendation of for or against a proposed development of an apartment complex along the southern tip of Riverfront Park.

“Given that this proposal presents both opportunities for the community and possible negative impacts to the City's premier events park, staff believes that the decision to grant the access easements is ultimately a policy decision for Council,” according to the staff report. “Thus, staff's recommendation to Council is to ‘consider’ the request for access, rather than the standard recommendation to ‘accept’ or ‘deny.’”

The developers of the Residences at Riverfront Park are asking Monday night for councilors to approve a redesign of the carousel parking lot to allow a private access road and to waive the site’s property taxes for 10 years.

“A request for the permanent private use of a City of Salem park property is very rare,” according to the staff report. “While such a request would typically be presented to Council with a staff recommendation for denial, this proposal is quite unique given its location and history.”

Kudos to Staver for researching and writing the story. However, I've emailed her asking why the story hasn't appeared in print yet. After all, we're just two days away from the City Council meeting. The public should have been made aware of the newly-released staff report a long time ago.

Which says that typically City staff would recommend that Pringle Square not be allowed to permanently take over part of the public Riverfront Park. But for some reason, this request isn't typical. My suspicion: because a lot of "political" pressure has been brought to bear on the City of Salem.

In this town, as almost everywhere, money talks louder than the public interest. Those who have, like Mountain West Investment and Marquis, get even more, while taxpayers foot the bill for private profit.

The author of the staff report which takes a pass on the typical "denial" recommendation is -- no big surprise -- Peter Fernandez. So here we go again: facts and the law say one thing; a moneyed businessman with strong political connections wants another thing.

Who wins out? We'll learn Monday night at the City Council meeting.

Staver's story reveals hitherto unknown facts about the plan to allow Pringle Square to convert part of the Carousel parking lot into a private thoroughfare into the apartment complex.

The report raised four specific concerns for councilors to address with the developers Monday night.

1) The private access road would not meet city fire code standards. Passing Portland & Western Railroad line trains could block the road and delay emergency response times. Staff recommended working with the developers to expand existing sidewalks in Riverfront Park to allow emergency vehicles to drive from Union Street NE to the apartments in an emergency.

2) The federal Land & Water Conservation Fund gave Salem grant money to build Riverfront Park. That means the city would need permission from the National Park Service to modify the carousel parking lot and to widen the sidewalks for emergency vehicles. City staff believe the park service will require the developer to donate 8,900 square feet of its land for park use in exchange for the sidewalks.

3) “Access to a residential development through a park parking lot is not compatible with the Riverfront Park Master Plan,” according to the report. “The master plan will need to be amended if the city ultimately grants access.”

4) Staff raised three concerns about the complex’s impact on Riverfront Park: The maintenance facility would need to be relocated. The new driveway would complicate event organizers’ abilities to control traffic during large events because that entrance couldn’t be closed. The new parking lot configuration could raise safety concerns for children visiting the carousel.

Fernandez' staff report is dated Tuesday, August 20. I believe it was released as part of the Council meeting agenda background materials. Don't know exactly when. I looked for the agenda earlier in the week and didn't find it online at the time.

The Statesman Journal put up an online story about the staff report Friday. Comments from those who noticed the story are almost entirely against giving away part of the park to a private developer. Maybe a story wll be in the SJ print edition tomorrow. Dick Hughes' twitter feed says he is writing an editorial about this issue for the Sunday paper.

So at a Council meeting in late August, when many people are on vacation or not tuned in to civic affairs, the City of Salem plans to make a decision on a request that city staff say typically would be denied, with virtually no information or notice given in advance to the public about how Pringle Square's private road would affect much-beloved Riverfront Park.

This is no way to run a city.

Once again, the public interest seemingly is being viewed as an inconvenient road block to acceding to special interests. I suspect that City leaders expect there to be an outcry if the Carousel access is approved, just as there was when the US Bank trees were cut down for no good reason.

For Salem's City officials, an outcry is a small price to pay for giving large private businesses what they want. The Chamber of Commerce is happy. Users of Riverfront Park aren't, but who cares? 

Along that line, I noted in the staff report that the contention of Pringle Square developers that more parking spaces somehow will materialize in the Carousel parking lot if part of the lot is used for a private road to the apartments is misleading. 

Construction of the new driveway will also require a complete reconstruction of the existing 72-space Riverfront Park parking lot. The development proposal includes a reconfigured 78-space parking lot. The additional six spaces are created through a small land donation to the City and creation of 33 compact parking spaces, 41 standard-sized spaces, and four ADA- accessible spaces for park users. 

So the Carousel parking lot would change from what I assume are 72 standard parking spaces, to 41 standard spaces and 33 compact spaces (plus 4 ADA spaces). Good luck on getting those strollers out of your minvans, moms and dads, when you have to park in a space designed for a small car.

If this bad idea is approved by the City Council and Mayor, you should send them the bill for fixing the dings and scratches on your car door when you try to squeeze out in order to enjoy Riverfront Park. 

Tell the City Council how you feel about the plan to give away part of Riverfront Park to a private developer: [email protected]

Salem's Pringle Square development needs more creative planning

Agreed: something needs to be done with the ghastly urban ruin -- the defunct Boise Cascade property -- lying along Salem's downtown riverfront. 

But something is a long way from anything.

As noted in a previous post about Mountain West Investment's proposed Pringle Square development, the spin being put on this uncreative mix of rental apartments and a nursing home (otherwise known as a post-acute rehabilitation facility) is that anything is better than the nothing of the rubble existing now.

Well, that's the traditional negative Salem attitude.

Portland, Corvallis, Eugene, and other cool Oregon cities get the appealing stuff. Supposedly we don't have the demographics, the creative class, the per capita income, the vibe, the whatever for a truly first-class development. 

In this case, a mixed use development that, if done right, would showcase Salem's riverfront, drawing both new and current residents to live, work, and play in a downtown area that has terrrific potential. 

Sadly, much of that potential is being missed with the current uncreative plans being pushed by Larry Tokarski of Mountain West Investment, Marquis (the nursing home company), and the usual Chamber of Commerce gang spouting the "something is better than nothing" line.

For a glimpse of what could be, check out today's Salem Breakfast on Bikes post, "Here's one idea for Pringle Square access -- What's your idea?" It looks for alternatives to making the Carousel parking lot into a thoroughfare to the apartment complex. And to the overall current design.

Anyway, here's one idea for a solution.  It accepts the basic deployment of the building units.

(A different site plan is almost certainly necessary for an optimal access solution.  As one commenter pointed out on the paper's article yesterday, the development lacks a waterfront restaurant.  It really seems like a better, more vibrant mixed-use scheme can be envisioned, and with that would come a different circulation pattern.  It's likely in the community's interest to go slow and get it right; the developer, on the other hand, probably wants to build now.  Somewhere in the middle hopefully there's a sweet spot of compromise.)

The idea here uses an already-planned driveway that goes underneaththe trestle.  It then requires a footbridge across the creek for access to the apartments.  It would be preferable to have a public footbridge and for the apartment complex to be less of a gated enclave, but if necessary, the parking lot and footbridge could be private. 

The footbridge concept is - perhaps naively - premised on the notion that spanning pringle creek is much shorter and would be easier and cheaper than spanning the slough.  The connection to the Carousel lot would be retained, but only for non-motorized travel (and emergency response).  This would give people on bike and on foot a direct shot to State Street and downtown.

Creative.

For sure there are other creative ways to improve Pringle Square. Including ditching the notion of a nursing home being a centerpiece of Salem's one and only downtown riverfront area.

As I noted here, City of Salem planning staff concluded that a nursing home isn't an allowed use in the South Waterfront Mixed Use zone. But the Salem Planning Commission, which is stacked with "anything is better than nothing" folks, ignored the staff recommendation.

Only in Salem... would City officials consider that a freaking nursing home deserves to be a highlight of the area adjacent to Salem's Convention Center, Carousel, and Riverfront Park. Look, I'm about to turn 65. I'm all for great health care facilities -- for the elderly, for the young, for everyone. 

But not on Salem's riverfront; not when a nursing home isn't even allowed there by the zoning code; and not when Marquis and Mountain West Investment are pushing a clearly illegal scheme to call nursing home beds "downtown multi-family housing" in order to get a tax break.

What bothers me about the way Pringle Square is being planned is the developers' unreasonable sense of entitlement. They appear to view the re-purposing of the Boise Cascade property as a one-way street: the public gives, and the private sector gets.

As noted in the Breakfast on Bikes post, a fence is planned that will wall off the Pringle Square apartments from the outside world. Residents will be able to pass through to use the publicly-funded amenties at Riverfront Park. The taxpayers who paid for those amenities apparently will be barred from Pringle Square.

Also, Mountain West Investment and Marquis want to avoid paying property taxes. The money lost by the City of Salem will be paid by other people. Or services will be cut by the City. More taking, not giving.

The developers of Pringle Square fail to sufficiently realize that they are a part of a community with mutual obligations, not private entrepreneurs who have the right to profit at the expense of those who laid the foundation for the success of a riverfront re-development.

Both the developers and the City of Salem need to slow down. Engage people. Listen to the concerns of those who want to preserve what Riverfront Park currently offers. Get creative. Expand your vision beyond the ordinary. Aim higher than mediocrity.

Yesterday the Statesman Journal ran a story about Pringle Square, "Boise Cascade project's fate rests on access." The comments on the piece were interesting. I'm including them as a continuation to this post so they don't get lost when the story moves into the newspaper's archives.

Here's one of the comments that I agree with:

Becky Custard

Once the developers of this site have acquired final approval for the planned apartment complex, the one single prime riverfront property in the downtown area of the city will have been designated nothing more than private apartments, and all opportunity for what could have been a jewel of a downtown destination/attraction will be gone forever.

Salem has not a single restaurant with a riverfront view. This area has all the potential to be a center of attraction for shopping and dining and enjoying the riverfront instead of shutting it off for a limited few apartment residents. The city of Salem has only this one chance to get this right. What a huge missed opportunity if the currently proposed plan is approved.

 

GOP health care plan: thousands die, millions go bankrupt

It's no wonder why People Who Care About Other People (PWCAOP) are abandoning the Republican party.

Us PWCAOP'ers don't believe in letting people die when they could be kept alive, and we don't believe in letting people go bankrupt when they could be financially healthy.

But the position of virtually every top-ranking Republican, including, so far as I can tell, every GOP member of Congress, is that the best thing to do is stop the Affordable Care Act, a.k.a. Obamacare, from going into effect.

Result: each year thousands die and millions go bankrupt. This isn't hyperbole. It is fact. 

America pays more for health care per capita than any other industrialized country in the world yet we have the most uninsured. An estimated 26,000-45,000 die every year for a lack of health insurance and millions more go bankrupt.

The 45,000 deaths per year figure comes from a study published in the American Journal of Public Health. Some of the researchers were at the Harvard Medical School. Here's an excerpt from a Harvard Gazette story.

Steffie Woolhandler, study co-author, professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School, and a primary care physician at Cambridge Health Alliance, noted: “Historically, every other developed nation has achieved universal health care through some form of nonprofit national health insurance. Our failure to do so means that all Americans pay higher health care costs, and 45,000 pay with their lives.”

“The Institute of Medicine, using older studies, estimated that one American dies every 30 minutes from lack of health insurance,” remarked David Himmelstein, study co-author, associate professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School, and a primary care physician at Cambridge Health Alliance. “Even this grim figure is an underestimate — now one dies every 12 minutes.”

Medical care costs are the biggest reason people file for bankruptcy. Having health insurance doesn't eliminate that risk entirely, but it sure helps. 

Bankruptcies resulting from unpaid medical bills will affect nearly 2 million people this year—making health care the No. 1 cause of such filings, and outpacing bankruptcies due to credit-card bills or unpaid mortgages, according to new data.

So how could anyone want to keep almost 30 million people from getting health insurance through the Affordable Care Act? Beats me. Seems like the only reason Republicans want to do this is a fear that Obamacare will succeed.

Yet even as Republican politicians seem ready to go on the offensive, there’s a palpable sense of anxiety, even despair, among conservative pundits and analysts. Better-informed people on the right seem, finally, to be facing up to a horrible truth: Health care reform, President Obama’s signature policy achievement, is probably going to work.

And the good news about Obamacare is, I’d argue, what’s driving the Republican Party’s intensified extremism. Successful health reform wouldn’t just be a victory for a president conservatives loathe, it would be an object demonstration of the falseness of right-wing ideology. So Republicans are being driven into a last, desperate effort to head this thing off at the pass.

Which won't work, of course. There's no way President Obama and congressional Democrats are going to stop the Affordable Care Act from being implemented. This is a life-saving, bankruptcy-preventing train that already has left the station.

Yet a disturbingly large number of Republicans have a fantasy of holding the debt ceiling hostage until Obamacare is killed. Raising the debt ceiling, of course, is simply agreeing to pay the bills that Congress already has incurred. It has nothing to do with future spending.

This ploy will fail.

Obama has said that he won't negotiate over the debt ceiling. And halfway reasonable Republicans like John McCain are refusing to go along with the crazy idea of wrecking the nation's credit rating just to make a political point. 

Hopefully the GOP will come to its senses and realize that it isn't good politics to be in favor of continuing to condemn thousands to die and millions to go bankrupt every year.

City of Salem must deny Marquis' absurd tax-incentive ploy

There's a lot to like about the planned Pringle Square development in downtown Salem (Oregon) near the riverfront. Getting rid of the Boise Cascade ruins and putting in apartments... great. 

Yes, I've been critical of how the Mountain West Investment company has backed off from an initial vision of a cool mixed use development that would bring some much-needed energy and excitement to Salem's riverfront. 

But at least the Pringle Square website speaks of "ground level cafés and retail in a riverfront setting." Hey, for a coffee addict like me, that's something. And the design looks like it has progressed from what, a year ago, I called:

Rental apartments. Unbeautifully stacked in what reminds me and my wife of (1) North Korean housing, (2) Chicago "projects," or (3) a poorly designed airline terminal.

What irks me the most at the moment is the horrible plan to make a Marquis Post-Acute Rehabilitation Facility, otherwise known as a "nursing home," part of the riverfront development. 

That's bad enough. A nursing home doesn't belong on the downtown riverfront next to the Carousel. A nursing home can go anywhere. Putting a short-term rehab facility at this location is an absurd idea.

A City of Salem staff report by Glenn Gross, the Urban Planning Administrator, made clear that the proposed rehab facility doesn't mesh with the uses allowed in the South Waterfront Mixed-Use Zone. So that should be enough to squash the idea.
Download Marquis memo 1 

However, the Nursing Home by the Carousel plan stumbles on.

Amazingly, the developers are even asking for the City of Salem to declare that this Post-Acute Rehab Facility, staffed by nurses and serving short-term patients, get a tax incentive intended to support "multi-unit housing in the core areas of Oregon's urban centers."

John Wales, Director of the Urban Development Department, told City Manager Linda Norris "no way."
Download Marquis memo 2

Not surprising, since Marquis' contention that nursing home rooms qualify as "multi-unit housing" is comical. It would have been fitting for Wales' memo to feature smiley-faces scattered throughout the analysis to show how bizarre the request was.

I recall that this tax-incentive request was on the last City Council agenda, but was pulled before the meeting. My suspicion is that Marquis and Mountain West wanted more time to lobby for the apparently illegal tax incentive.

What are the chances that the Mayor and city councillors will ignore facts, the law, and staff recommendations that a nursing home (1) doesn't mesh with zoning for the area, and (2) doesn't qualify for a "multi-unit housing" tax incentive?

Sadly, greater than a reasonable person would expect. This should be a slam-dunk Marquis rehab facility denial. But the City of Salem has been making some unreasonable decisions lately. 

Allowing five healthy large downtown trees to be cut down by US Bank for no good reason. Giving the go-ahead to an unneeded, unwanted, and unpaid-for $650 million Third Bridge. Trying to foist parking meters on downtown for spurious reasons without ever talking with small businesses in the area. Attempting to place a regressive streetlight tax on citizens.

Hopefully the Salem City Council will understand that facts and the law trump political pressure from wealthy developers and the Chamber of Commerce. If Marquis gets its way, this will be a clear sign that the City of Salem has stopped serving the public interest and cares only about special interests.

Go-Pro video of me tubing down the cold Metolius river

If you're looking for You Tube videos of someone tubing down central Oregon's Metolius River, look no farther than... me!

A few days ago I put up the World''s First You Tube Metolius River Tubing Video. That was shot by my wife from bankside. 

Now -- behold! -- I reveal the World's First You Tube Go-Pro Point of View Metolius River Tubing Video.

This was taken via a chest mount on a solo tubing run that I made after daughter, granddaughter, son-in-law, and me had tubed down another stretch of the Metolius (video of that needs to be edited; coming soon).

I'm pretty damn proud of 64 year-old me. As I say in the video, hardly anybody tubes down the Metolius. In fact, hardly anybody floats down the upper reaches of the Metolius on any sort of device. 

Hopefully this video will get more tubers into the admittedly cold water -- 48 degrees at the spring-fed source; I'm tubing close to the source, before any warmer-water creeks flow into the Metolius. 

The river moves right along between the Tract C bridge and just before Lake Creek; there's enough riffles, curves, logs, islands, branches, and what-not to keep the tubing interesting (paddle highly recommended for maneuvering); the Metolius is super-beautiful, world-class beauty. 

What's not to like, besides the cold water? I had a lot of fun. Watch me enjoying the Metolius.

 

Dick Withnell calls for Salem riverfront mediocrity

A few days ago Salem businessman Dick Withnell tried to make the re-development of Salem's Boise Cascade site sound a lot better than it really is. 

Good try, Dick. But I found your "Boise Cascade site a great opportunity" guest opinion in the Statesman Journal decidedly unpersuasive.

As noted in my recent Salem Weekly Strange Up Salem column, Larry Tokarski and Mountain West Investment have given up on the appealing original concept for the riverfront property.

I thought of this when I read an opinion piece by Larry Tokarski in Salem’s non-alternative newspaper. Tokarski heads up the company that is developing the old Boise Cascade property on the riverfront.

Tokarski spoke about how excited he was in 2006 when the Urban Land Institute presented a vision that included “an appealing mix of restaurants, shops, grocery, hotel, residential and office uses.”

Among other reasons that prevented this vision from becoming reality, Tokarski cites “multiple limitations regarding our market.” I translated that as: not enough cool people able and willing to patronize cool businesses.

...Developers like Tokarski need to do their part also. Take a chance on Salem. Not recklessly. Confidently. Remember “If you build it, he will come.” She, too.

I hope Tokarski will rethink being content with a medical rehab facility and apartments on Salem’s riverfront. That isn’t cool.

Withnell has the attitude that keeps Salem mired in a morass of mediocrity. Something, anything, whatever happening in Salem is better than nothing. Instead of aspiring to a full-glass city that draws people and businesses in, he says:

What a great opportunity, both for the city of Salem and its residents, to see the glass being half-full with the “new vision for the old Boise Cascade site,” initiated by Mountain West Investment Corp.

Well, here's an even better opportunity: a full freaking glass!

The new vision Withnell speaks of is, as noted in my column (1) rental apartments fenced off from Riverfront Park, and (2) a medical rehab facility. Whoopee.

I guess San Antonio's River Walk area (photo above) can stop worrying about Salem being a competitor. Our glass isn't even half-full compared to other cities that have made their riverfront a real hotbed of economic and recreational activity. More like a few drops full.

One of Salem's biggest problems is a lack of vision. Also, of confident courage. Businessmen like Withnell and Tokarski are afraid of taking a chance on hitting a home run. They are satisfied with small ball singles.

Which don't add up to a genuine score. No matter how many glass half-full's Salem has, none of them yield a satisfying world-class, nation-class, or even state-class project/development.

Withnell focuses on the economic benefits the apartments and rehab center supposedly will bring. I suspect these are exaggerated. Yet even if they come to pass, Salem is still left with much less than could have been. 

Remember: a full glass can hold twice as much money as a half-glass.

Here's another part of Withnell's opinion piece that struck me as dubious.

I have lived in Salem for almost 50 years, and the livability of our Mid-Willamette Valley has been initiated by private entrepreneurial types who believe this is the best place to live.

They are showing this by passage of bond issues, including both Chemeketa and School District 24J, coupled with the sweat equity of hundreds of volunteers/mentors — all carrying water to make this the best place in which to live, raise a family and retire.

Huh? I've lived in Salem for 36 years. I've never thought, nor have I ever talked with anyone who thought, that this area's livability springs from "private entrepreneurial types."

To paraphrase a line we heard much of in the last presidential election: "Mr. Withnell, private entrepreneurial types did not build Salem's livability. You guys did not build this."

Everybody did. Including government workers. Including people of all sorts. Not just private entrepreneurs. 

Further, saying that the Salem area is "the best place in which to live, raise a family and retire" is ridiculous. Some people would agree. Many wouldn't. The fact that many other parts of Oregon and the country are experiencing a much greater influx of visitors, homebuyers, and business relocations shows that Salem isn't exactly the peak of Livability Mountain.

Withnell then says:

Opportunities of this magnitude, as presented by Larry Tokarski through his company, do not come often. It’s an old adage, but “one in the hand is better than two in the bush.” 

Huh? An opportunity to build a couple of apartment buildings and a medical rehab facility don't come often? That opportunity comes all the time. What won't come often, and in fact won't ever come again, is the opportunity to develop Salem's one and only downtown riverfront area in a full-glass way.

That opportunity shouldn't be forsaken.

But I'm afraid that it will be, because too many business and political leaders in Salem are content with having that proverbial single bird, while other cities have leaders who aren't content until they've got birds in each hand.

(Because the Statesman Journal quickly files stories away into paid archives, I'll include Withnell's opinion piece as a continuation to this post.)

Metolius River tubing video -- first on You Tube!

Below is rare footage of people tubing down a stretch of the Metolius River in central Oregon, a river known for its beauty, cold water, great fly fishing, and...

Notable lack of people tubing down it.

I know this, because I've visited the Metolius regularly for over fifteen years. I've only seen a tube in the river once or twice, at most.

Like I said, the Metolius is cold. Spring-fed from snow melt in the upper reaches, where the video below was taken on an August, 2013 day. It also is a wild and scenic river, so when a tree falls into it (which is often), the tree stays where it is.

Thus scouting of the Metolius is essential before going down it in a tube, kayak, boat, or anything else. Once that is done, have fun! 

The video shot by my wife shows me, my daughter, and son-in-law having a lot of fun going down a short stretch of the Metolius: just downstream from the Tract C bridge to just upstream of where Lake Creek joins the river.

(My six year old granddaughter tubed with her father, but I don't think footage of her made it into the video.)

I'm in an orange shirt. I'm seen both in a tube, and on the bank shouting directional advice to my daughter on her first trip down. We're using River Run tubes and tubing paddles, as described in a previous blog post. 

So far as I can tell, this is the first Metolius River tubing video to appear on You Tube. I feel like Lewis & Clark, Magellan, Christopher Columbus, and the Vikings who sailed to Greenland. All combined.

This is adventuring at its finest. Well, at least at its tubest. In bathing suits, bare feet, and cold butts we braved a river that usually only fly fisherpeople in waders get in. Watch and marvel.

 

Camp Sherman forest fire raises questions about "containment"

The Green Ridge fire near Camp Sherman in central Oregon is nearing 100% containment. Its been burning away for ten days after a lightning strike got it going on July 31.

Though the fire has been heading away from Camp Sherman and the Metolius river, naturally people in the area have been concerned about its spread -- now up to 1,500 acres, according to the latest official fire info.

Since my wife and I are part owners of a cabin on leased forest service land, Friday evening I decided to attend a fire status meeting for residents and visitors at the charming Camp Sherman Community Hall. 

It was great to get a first-hand report on how the fire fighting efforts are going. In short, very well.

Personnel and equipment, such as helicopters, are being shifted to higher priority fires. There have only been two minor firefighter injuries, not counting lots of bee stings. The fire made a run to the east that was caused by wind-driven spot fires, but that is pretty much under control.

After the Fire Guy (didn't get a name) made his presentation, a Q & A session ensued. Several people wanted to know what "containment" meant. I'm glad they asked those questions. 

I've had a vague idea about what it means when someone says, "The Whatever Fire is 30% contained," but I didn't really understand the notion of containment. I got educated some by the Fire Guy.

One questioner was confused by how it was possible for the Green Ridge fire to expand from 1,150 to 1,510 acres while the percent containment went from 50% to 75%. How could the burned area get bigger while so much progress was made on containing it?

The answer is that "containment" refers to the perimeter of a fire, not the area. If the perimeter is 10 miles, and containment lines are present on 7 miles, then the fire is 70% contained. But the fire still could be spreading via the uncontained 3 miles. 

Fire Guy explained that containment lines can be established roads, natural barriers (like a river), or hand-constructed lines. I believe he said that the inside of the line has to be blackened, burned, before a line is considered a genuine containment line.

Also, mop-up operations have to be completed before a perimeter section is called "contained."

This includes watering-down hot spots near the line so embers can't be blown over it. Thus even though a line has been dug, it won't be considered part of the containment percentage until the mopping up adjacent to the line is complete.

Regarding how a fire is contained, Fire Guy stated the obvious: you don't want to be in front of a rapidly-spreading fire. So those fighting it start by anchoring the bottom of the area being burned, then work to contain the edges. Containment of the front of the fire comes last.

(Those who want to get into some geekiness of what "containment" means should read George Rebane's post, "Wildfire Containment Percentage: Say What??!!" Including the comments.)

If marijuana is good medically, why not legalize it?

Today CNN's chief medical correspondent, Sanjay Gupta, came out and said that he has been wrong about medical marijuana. In part because the federal government has been lying about marijuana's supposed dangers and lack of benefits.

I mistakenly believed the Drug Enforcement Agency listed marijuana as a schedule 1 substance because of sound scientific proof. Surely, they must have quality reasoning as to why marijuana is in the category of the most dangerous drugs that have "no accepted medicinal use and a high potential for abuse."

They didn't have the science to support that claim, and I now know that when it comes to marijuana neither of those things are true. It doesn't have a high potential for abuse, and there are very legitimate medical applications. In fact, sometimes marijuana is the only thing that works. 

Hey, better late than never, Dr. Gupta.

Twenty states already have legalized medical marijuana. Two states have made it legal for all adults. (See this map.) Obviously citizens have managed to learn the truth about marijuana well before a lot of "leaders" who should be better informed.

This is annoyingly common these days. Ordinary people have better sense than the politicians they send off to Washington, D.C. to represent them. 

Like Gupta says, it is crazy that marijuana still is classified in the Most Dangerous Drug category. It also is crazy that virtually every Republican in Congress doesn't accept the scientific facts about global warming. Truthiness has replaced truth in many political circles. 

Fortunately, the times seem to be a'changing. Bill Maher calls marijiuana the new gay marriage. 

"By that, I mean it's the next obvious civil rights issue that needs to fall," he says, before explaining that marijuana advocates must take a page from marriage equality activists and make Mary Jane popular. "Gays simply demanded it" he says. "They didn't care that it wasn't popular. They put it on the agenda and they made it popular."

 

I'm hoping that Oregon will get its act together and legalize marijiuana in 2014. The Oregon Cannabis Tax Act folks have a great chance of succeeding, in part because an initiative to legalize gay marriage almost certainly will be on the ballot.

The 2012 marijuana legalization effort was horribly organized. Yet 46% of Oregonians still voted "yes." With fresh leadership Oregon could become the third state to legalize marijuana, after Colorado and Washingtonl 

Next year lots of Oregonians will be crossing the Columbia to buy pot legally in Washington state.

Voters need to be told that this money could be staying in Oregon rather than enriching Washington's tax coffers. And that marijuana is a much safer recreational drug than alcohol, with hugely fewer detrimental effects.

My Strange Up shout-out to Salem citizen activists

Hey, this is two-week old news... but summer is for slowing down. Forgot to blog about my last Strange Up Salem column -- which Salem Weekly called your activisting strange in its online offering.

(Copied in below)

I wrote it before I knew that the Stop Parking Meters Downtown folks had succeeded in getting a freaking magnificent 8,000 signatures on a petition to, not surprisingly, stop parking meters downtown. 

Great example of how determined citizens can rage successfully against the City Hall machine. Salem's political leaders are on a roll... straight dowhill from the Public Servant Summit that they should be aspiring to.

Third Bridge. Downtown parking meters. US Bank trees. Streetlight tax. Whatever the Mayor, City Manager, and City Councillors have touched recently, has turned into something cheap and ugly.

They're like political anti-Midas'es.

Like I said in my column, there's a lot of Groupthink going on in the halls of City of Salem power. When highly controversial issues end up getting 9-0 votes in the council chamber, it's pretty obvious that officials aren't tuned in to what the general public is asking for.

Honesty. Transparency. Elevation of the public interest above special interests. Openness. Creativity. Out-of-the-box thinking. Attention to facts.

Salem activists tend to be viewed by the city's power structure as irritating gadflys. Brushing them away is the goal, not attending to what they have to say. That's unfortunate.

For both Salem's citizens and the politicians. 

Those who fail to hear the sound of disgruntled voters run the risk of being unpleasantly surprised when a revolution overthrows the politically deaf. Much better for public servants to ask, "How can we better serve you?"

A question that the current leadership of the City of Salem rarely, if ever, thinks of. Here's the Strange Up Salem column.

Viva la Revolution! Ongoing variety. After Americans revolted in 1776 against an external oppressor, Great Britain, we’ve continued to fight against internal threats to democracy, liberty, and the broad public interest.

So here’s a big shout-out to the citizen activists in Salem who protest wrongs that need to be righted. Without your forebears, we wouldn’t have a country. 

Nor equal rights for women, blacks, and gays. Nor environmental, workplace, and consumer protections. Nor so many other achievements that began with a few people echoing Network’s noted line, “We’re mad as hell, and we’re not going to take it any more.”

I’ve been there. Done that. Still am. 

Thus I feel much empathy for the No Third Bridge folks who’ve put in so much effort attending meetings, educating citizens, testifying at hearings, and otherwise raging against an unneeded Bridgasaurus that threatens to trample Salem’s livability and pocketbook.

Ditto for the Stop Downtown Parking Meters activists who’ve tirelessly worked to gather petition signatures for an initiative aimed at preventing a parking meter proposal from going into effect that could deeply hurt small downtown businesses. 

There are so many other local activists. Sorry I couldn’t mention you all.

Activism is tough. Usually defeats outnumber victories at first. The Power Structure is aptly named: it’s difficult to impact. Politicians, government officials, and corporate interests have deep connections.

Like Don Quixote, us citizen activists can feel like we’re dreaming the impossible dream, fighting the unbeatable foe, righting the unrightable wrong.

Maybe Rosa Parks felt that way after she refused to give up her bus seat to a white person. Could she imagine that nine years later the Civil Rights Act of 1964 would outlaw discrimination once so firmly engrained in American culture?

One determined person can make a difference. I tear up from the Man of La Mancha lyrics: 

“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.”

Keep fighting, good citizens of Salem. Remember: your opponents aren’t evil. 

Often they suffer from Groupthink, a malady diagnosed by someone who testified at a recent City Council meeting. It is exacerbated by an isolation from outside influences.

The treatment? Opening up flows of information, discussion, collaboration, decision-making. Transparency. Listening to both sides. Considering creative alternative options. Doing this sincerely, not with lip service.

Huston Smith quotes a Zen friend. “I have a new koan: I could be wrong.” Beautiful. The best revolutions happen when people in power revolt against their own dogmatic attitudes and actions.

Often, though, they need the aid of a citizen activist pin to help puncture the Groupthink balloon in which they have encased themselves. City leaders, don’t fear this

Activists like me aren’t out to get you. We’re trying to help you make better decisions by facing facts and public values head-on, honestly engaging with the citizens you serve. 

----------------------------------
Strange Up Salem seeks to lift our city’s Blah Curse. Give us a Facebook like. Brian Hines blogs at hinesblog.com

Photos/videos of 2013 Willamette Humane Society Mutt Strut

My wife, Laurel, is a volunteer for the Willamette Humane Society here in Salem, Oregon. She walks shelter dogs one day a week, along with walking our dogs every day of the week. 

Yesterday she helped out at the 2013 WillaMutt Strut event at Riverfront Park. Here's Laurel with our younger, smaller dog, Zu Zu. She aided Annie Ingersoll, Humane Society dog trainer extraordinaire (in straw hat) at the Teach Your Dog a Trick booth.

 

Naturally I demanded to see a trick. Here's a video of Laurel complying.

We left old dog Serena at home. I wanted to defend our hard-won last place finish in the 2012 1.5K Mutt Strut Walk, figuring that with Serena another year older and slower (she's thirteen and a half), we'd have an excellent chance of coming in last again.

But Laurel said she needed to stay at the booth during the 1.5K and 5K Mutt Struts, so I'd have to take Zu Zu on the walk.

No problem. With a 16 ounce mug of coffee in hand, I was ready to go. This year I wanted to do a yin and yang thing: after coming in last in the 2012 1.5K walk, I wanted to be first in the 2013 5K walk. 

I felt good at the start line. And after the 5K walk got underway, I sensed that both Zu and Zu and I were poised for greatness. However, even though I'm married to a habitually fast woman walker, I'd forgotten how quickly females can strut, with or without a mutt.

For the entire route -- across the Union Street pedestrian bridge, through Wallace Marine Park, and back to the end of Riverfront Park -- I watched this woman's distinctive hat remain considerably ahead of me and Zu Zu.

She rocked at the Mutt Strut.

I consider that she was first in the 5K walk, since two people who may have finished ahead of her jogged at times. Her dog also took home the WillaMutt honor (most muttiest mutt). I was fifth in this nominally non-competitive walk that I dearly wanted to win.

However, after mentally eliminating the two 5K walk Struters who jogged here and there, and giving myself a 30 second credit for picking up Zu Zu dog poop close to the finish line (here's a photo of me with the bagged evidence after we finished), and another 30 second credit for Zu Zu pausing to sniff scents more than other dogs did, I give myself Second Place.

Next year... who knows what could be possible with a larger mug of coffee. And making sure Zu Zu poops at home before the Mutt Strut.

The Humane Society mascot was much in evidence, making friends with canines and humans alike. 

 

A highlight of the event for me was a danceoff between Mascot Dog and Mascot Bear. They did their dancing thing while music played for a musical chairs dog game. In the video above I've strung together their oh-so-cute dances.

Didn't show who won, because anyone who dances energetically in dog and bear suits on an August day is a winner to me.

However, the same "everybody is a winner" doesn't apply to the final event of the Mutt Strut, the above-mentioned WillaMutt muttiest mutt judging. I'd entered last year with Zu Zu and lost. I wasn't planning to try again this year, but Laurel shoved me out into the judging area when the competition began.

It didn't go well.

Laurel does the dog training in our home, so when Annie Ingersoll asked to see what tricks the prospective WillaMutt's could do, I was left essentially trickless -- even though Zu Zu knows quite a few. I couldn't even get our dog to sit, since Zu Zu was focused on running back to Laurel.

Desperate to garner some laughs, since I wasn't showing off Zu Zu's muttness very well, I told Annie that I had an unusual ability to time-travel my dog tricks.

Demonstrating, after Zu Zu started walking toward Laurel I said "walk!" After she laid down I said "lay!" I tried to convince the judging audience that Zu Zu was responding to my commands in a time-inverted psychic corner of the cosmos.

From the pitiful applause we got, which determined the WillaMutt winner, it appears that either (1) Zu Zu is just too damn cute to be the WIllaMutt, or (2) I am terrible at selling her WillaMutt'ness. Or, most likely, both.

I probably should switch to the Lookalike contest next year. 

This was the female part of the couple that won this time. The guy she was with wore a different colored tutu. Hey, I could pull something like that off.

A woman wearing a Tae Kwon Do outfit that matched her dog's "gi" was in the top three Lookalike's. Good job. It isn't all that easy to put a top with long sleeves on a dog. 

Broken Pringle Parkade meters irritate Salem parkers

Ah, what delicious irony.

And what a wonderful additional reason why the City of Salem shouldn't be trusted with its proposal to put parking meters in downtown Salem, a.k.a. "the 20% tax on small business gross receipts." 

Today my wife and five female friends met for lunch at the Marco Polo Global Restaurant. Each drove her own car. Four parked in the Pringle Parkade. 

Together, they had to move their cars eleven times to find a working parking meter. Three women encountered three broken parking meters each. One woman encountered two broken meters.

There weren't obvious "Broken" signs on the meters. A few had broken notices on the back.

So they would pull into a parking space, get out of their car, find that the meter wasn't working (one woman lost 50 cents), get back into their car, move to another space, and repeat the irritating cycle.

Repeat: eleven times. In addition, they saw a family of five get out of their car and do the same broken parking meter dance.

At lunch, they wondered how this affected the restaurant. Nobody likes to put money in parking meters. But when you have to work so hard to find a working meter -- even more irritating.

Here's the delicious irony:

The City of Salem wants to install meters in onstreet parking spaces in downtown Salem, which currently are free with a two-hour limit. Why? Because the City claims that the current parking tax charged to downtown businesses doesn't provide sufficient revenue to maintain free parking in the area parking garages.

Yet the Pringle Parkade already has parking meters. Mostly non-working, it seems.

So the City of Salem isn't able to maintain this non-downtown parking garage propertly even though it is getting parking meter revenue from it. Why, then, should the citizens of Salem believe that making onstreet downtown parkers plug meters will solve the City's supposed parking garage maintenance problem?

The City has installed meters in the Pringle Parkade, yet obviously isn't capable of maintaining them in working order. This shows that the City of Salem doesn't have a revenue problem; it has a management problem.

The Mayor, City Manager, and City Councillors aren't making sound policy decisions. Not on parking meters that will harm downtown businesses. Not on an unneeded Third Bridge. Not on cutting down the US Bank trees for no good reason. Not on other poorly thought-out notions like a regressive streetlight tax.

A City that can't maintain the parking meters it already has shouldn't be asking to install hundreds more in downtown Salem. Especially when these new meters are unneeded and unwanted -- 8,000 people have signed a petition to ban downtown parking meters.