Salem Community Vision has small-town values

I moved to Salem, Oregon in 1977 from Raleigh Hills, a Portland suburb. Right away I liked Salem's small town feel, even though it had quite a few big town amenities.

This still is a big plus for Salem. Or, should be. 

Because some old-fashioned small town values are slipping away under the current City of Salem leadership: Mayor Anna Peterson, City Manager Linda Norris, Public Works Director Peter Fernandez, and city councillors Chuck Bennett, Laura Tesler, Brad Nanke, Rich Clausen, Diana Dickey, Sheryl Thomas, Warren Bednarz, and Dan Clem.

Divisiveness rules. Citizen participation in important policy decisions is viewed as a nuisance rather than a necessity. Deliberations by City of Salem officials are made with little openness and much secretiveness.

Examples abound.

A few days ago I asked, "Will Salem City Council spend $400 million with no public hearing?" Astoundingly, this is what Peter Fernandez is recommending. Approve a new Third Bridge design that displaces dozens of residences and businesses without giving people a chance to express their opinion on it.

I've also blogged about how the City of Salem ballooned a University of Oregon student project into a $70 - 90 million over-stuffed Civic Center renovation proposal. Local experts say that at least $40 million could be saved by taking a smarter approach to earthquake-proofing the Civic Center and building a new Police Facility. 

(See here, here, and here.)

Two of those experts are Gene Pfeifer and Geoffrey James. They were instrumental in finding a way to repair Courthouse Square at a much lower cost than Marion County was planning to spend. 

Now Pfeifer and James have helped found Salem Community Vision, which I've become involved with.

After attending three Salem Community Vision meetings I'm optimistic about the potential of this citizen group. Its goal is to involve the entire Salem community in creating a vision of what we want our town to be.

This, of course, is what City of Salem officials should be doing themselves. But the current administration at City Hall isn't big on listening to citizens. They're much better at talking, then turning a deaf ear when they get a response that doesn't fit with their preconceived idea of what should be done.

Not good. We need to restore some small-town values to how Salem is governed.

Get people together and ask, "What do you want? What do you think? What sort of town do you want Salem to be?" Listen to everybody. Be neighborly. Consider all ideas, all alternatives, all suggestions. Respect facts; honor diverse values; be happy to say "Hey, you're right and I'm wrong" when this needs saying.

I grew up in a small unincorporated town of about 900 people. Currently I live in a rural south Salem community of about 300 people, where I've served as the neighborhood organization's secretary for over twenty years.

So I am familiar with really small-town values. People treat each other honestly and openly without "political" game-playing. It doesn't matter if you're liberal or conservative, Democrat or Republican, or none of the above.

By and large (there are always exceptions), small-town folks are problem-focused. They want to make things better, not score personal or ideological points. Everybody is treated the same, no matter their job, income, or whatever. They make a dollar go as far as possible, being conservative in the sense of conserving.

Salem Community Vision is out to restore that sort of good sense to our city.

Let's bring back a feeling of "we're all in this together." Our public servants need to be reminded of what it means to serve the public, rather than dictate to the public. 

If you haven't already, give Salem Community Vision a Facebook "like." Especially if you like small-town values.

Comments

[Curt]

If the vision is for a small town stuck in the 70's--MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!! Nothing reflects 1970's small town suburban values more than Salem's soul-crushing network of decrepit strip malls, parking lagoons and traffic sewers.

Its the Chamber's desire to market those small town values in their quest to turn Dallas, Rickreal, Independence, Monmouth into the next Portland exurb that is driving the push for the bridge.

But I agree that the Salem Community Vision for a recycled, discount, Walmart police station that totally disregards the needs of the Salem police reflects those small town suburban values. I just don't think its working very well. Salem might have the poorest quality of life in the Mid Valley because it has all the worst qualities of a big city and a small town in one dysfunctional package. Salem has the violent traffic, asphalt, sprawl, urban poverty and crime like a city but without the cultural amenities, shopping, services, diversity, or vibrant urban life of a city. It has totally failed to preserve any of the small town charm of places like Silverton, Monmouth, or McMinnville but we are still deprived of many of the services that other cities Salem's size take for granted. We don't even have very good access to outdoor recreation that other small town in the valley have.

In fact, when it comes to small town charm, Portland's streetcar neighborhoods blow Salem away.

[Brian Hines]

Curt, I agree with almost all of what you said. However, I disagree that building a Police Facility at an existing site is a horrible thing. Eugene did it, and the police department there says they were happy with the renovation.

I suspect the Salem Police staff have been told to stick to the City Party Line on this issue. Anyway, it is up to the citizens of Salem to tell their "public servants" how they feel about wasting $40 million on a brand new building crammed into the Civic Center property, complete with underground parking at $50,000 a space rather than the usual $20,000.

All Salem Community Vision is saying is, "let's talk... about options... about alternatives... about what is best for the taxpayers and the entire community -- not just a few government officials. Questions are always good. When people are scared of questioning, this is a sign that something is amiss.

The City of Salem shouldn't be afraid of citizens asking whether $40 million can be saved.

[Curt]

Well SCV clearly doesn't want to talk about options, or grade school math. Geoffrey James went to the same open house I did and here is what he has said about the cost of the proposed police facility:

"The Police Palace includes underground parking and at that meeting Linda said it was $13 million. So $23 + $13 = $46 million Police Facility".

I have questioned him about this statement and its the same evasion and obfuscation. Its more of the same villager group think that we have seen from the downtown Tea Parking Party and No Pringle Access. Has it come to that is Salem? Where if enough villagers agree to suspend the law of mathematics and repeat it enough it becomes true? Its like something out of a dystopian science fiction horror movie.

So what do say about Geoffry James' statement Brian? Is Geoffrey James correct or incorrect?

[Brian Hines]

Curt, Geoffrey James' figure for the total is correct. I'm pretty sure Geoff knows how to add. He and other members of Salem Community Vision have been using $45-46 million as the likely cost of the City's proposal for a Police Headquarters. So I suspect Geoff meant to say "33" + $13 = $46 million.

I come up with almost exactly the same total cost of the Police Headquarters using figures shown on a slide presented at the June 2013 City Council work session.

Police headquarters cost is shown as $32.1 million. This is 63% of the Civic Center construction total of $50.8 million. Soft costs are shown as $10 million. Allocating 63% of those to the Police Headquarters adds $6.3 million to the cost.

Then there is $9.7 million for 2017 cost escalation, since the construction wouldn't happen until then. Allocating 63% of that cost to the Police Headquarters adds $6.1 million.

So we get: $32.1 million plus $6.3 million plus $6.1 million, which totals $44.5 million.

Again, Curt, this is from the City's own June 2013 Civic Center cost estimate. Compare this with Eugene's $17 million similarly sized Police Headquarters.

Salem Community Vision wants to save taxpayers $25 million or so by smarter planning. What bothers you about that, Curt? Don't you agree that the City's $45 million budget for a new Police Headquarters is way higher than it should be?

[Curt]

More of the obtuse villager routine. They won't even accept your numbers. When someone is that evasive, it's a sure sign they are either hiding something, they don't know what they are talking about, or both. No wonder the transit mall collapsed when the villagers insist are so excited to build public structures on shifting sands.

[Brian Hines]

Curt, what are you talking about? The numbers I gave are the City of Salem's numbers. Right out of a presentation to the City Council. Are you saying that the City won't accept its own numbers?

Plain fact: the City is planning a $46 million Police Facility that is the same size as a Police Facility Eugene built for $17 million. If you can refute that fact, do so. If not, accept the fact.

[cc]

When you live in Salem, keep your head down and your mouth shut, or be the object of the next witch-hunt.