HinesSight

Gil Penalosa shows Salem how to become a more vibrant city

A week ago noted urban designer Gil Penalosa gave a talk at a Willamette University law school lecture hall that should have gotten a lot more attention than it did.

I sat through Penalosa's two-hour presentation thinking, "Everybody in Salem should be hearing what he's saying. But pretty much, only those who already believe in his 8-80 vision are here tonight."

By 8-80 is meant: city streets should be designed to be safely and pleasantly walkable/bikable by a child of eight or an elderly person of 80. Along with everybody in between. 

I first learned about Penalosa and his brother in a great book, "Happy City." Blogged about it here.

Penalosa accomplished a lot in Bogota, Columbia, of all places. Which, he said, has a per capita income that is 1/8 of Salem's.

Yet Bogota has a hugely better bus, bicycle, and pedestrian transportation system. Given that fact, you'd think City of Salem elected officials and staff would have attended Penalosa's talk in droves. But they weren't much in attendance, from what I could tell. 

(See this Breakfast on Bikes post about who the intended audience for Penalosa's talk is/was.)

I found the guy's energy, passion, and knowledge about smart urban design highly appealing. Wish someone could have bottled it, then mainlined it into the brains of our Mayor, City Manager, Public Works Director, and City Councillors.

Sure, he gives his PowerPoint talk often all around the world. You can't fake the sort of enthusiasm he showed at the Salem talk, though. Here's a much abbreviated version:

 

I took lots of notes. Penalosa made so many good points, and said so many interesting things, it's tough to summarize his message. I'll content myself with some bullet point sharings.

-- There is no such thing as bad weather, just bad clothing. Quoting a Danish "street philosopher" regarding how people in Copenhagen, which has a climate a lot like ours, are extremely avid bicycle commuters.

-- Change doesn't happen by consensus. Change is hard. Educate children, and they will educate their parents.

-- Goal is vibrant cities, sustainable happiness.

-- We've got to stop building cities as if everybody was 30 years old and athletic (which is just about the only sort of person who dares ride downtown Salem's bicycle unfriendly streets).

-- We humans have learned to survive. Now we must learn how to live. 

-- Every trip, by car or otherwise, begins and ends with walking. One-half of trips in North America are within a 20 minute bike ride.

-- People walk. Birds fly. Fish swim.

-- Why are children only safe in front of their school? Have a 20 mph speed limit in all residential areas. This is a symbol of respect for people. Speed kills.

-- Cities must have (1) a lower speed limit on all neighborhood streets, and (2) a network of protected bikeways.

-- It is time to be BOLD. 

-- Downsizing from two cars to one, or from one to none, saves someone $9,000 a year. This money stays in the local economy. It only costs $1,800 a year to get around without a car.

-- We are unique, just like everyone else. Quoting Margaret Mead. Need to compare with the best cities, not the cities doing almost as poorly as Salem.

-- Salem needs a good quality of life to attract the best people, people who can choose to live anywhere they want.

Salem Breakfast on Bikes asked a good question in another post: "After Gil, what next?"

Great question. The City Council and other leaders in our semi-fair town need to get off their carcentric butts and start making Salem much more pedestrian and bicycle friendly.

Otherwise, as Penalosa said, people who want quality of life and can choose where they live will pass Salem by, as so many professionals and executives already do (working in Salem and living in Portland is a common lifestyle choice).

Stupid idea: allowing Oregon cities to ban medical marijuana dispensaries

In this year's abbreviated legislative session the Oregon Senate Judiciary Committee did the right thing when it stripped out a provision that would have allowed cities and counties to ban medical marijuana dispensaries altogether. 

(The 2013 Legislature authorized dispensaries, which previously operated in a grey area, and possibly illegally.)

But today the House Judiciary Committee voted to put the ability-to-ban back into the bill. The Weed Blog notes the absurdity here:

If a ban does ultimately pass, something very ironic to me will happen. Dispensaries had very little enforcement when they were illegal. However, it will only be after they become officially legal that they might be shut down. I think certain counties will be OK, such as Multnomah County. But counties like Jackson County, Clatsop County, Marion County, and some others might not be so lucky. I guess only time will tell.

There are other reasons to call this a stupid idea. 

Notably, it is a solution in search of a problem. Where is the need for cities and counties to ban medical marijuana dispensaries?

Alcohol is way more dangerous than marijuana. Yet liquor stores and bars abound. Alcohol is sold in businesses frequented by children and teenagers. Why don't Oregon cities and counties ban the sale of alcohol?

Oh, almost forgot. Monmouth did. Then decided it was a stupid idea. 

Same is true of bans on medical marijuana dispensaries. A University of Colorado study found that they cause no more problems than coffee shops do. 

A medical marijuana dispensary in the Denver area doesn't have any more impact on its neighborhood than does a coffee shop or a drugstore, according to a recent study released by the University of Colorado Denver. Not only that, but residents don't perceive a dispensary as an undesirable use of a storefront.

These findings counter the constant negative messages coming from law enforcement and anti-cannabis crusaders.

So the only reason a city or county would choose to ban medical marijiuana dispensaries is because some elected officials don't like people using marijuana. Yet medical marijiuana is legal in Oregon. And recreational marijuana use may soon be. 

It's crazy to make a cancer patient on chemotherapy who has been prescribed medical marijuana drive a long distance to get to a dispensary. After all, the 2013 Legislature legalized dispensaries in the entire state. 

Why allow certain cities and counties to opt out of a statewide law? Recently there was an attempt to do this with the ban on hunting cougars with dogs. Twice Oregon voters approved the ban. But some legislators introduced a bill that would have allowed counties to opt out of the law.

I submitted testimony against the bill that said this would set a horrible precedent. If every city and county can decide whether it wants to follow a statewide law, we'll end up with a confusing legal balkanization. 

There's no reason to allow Oregon cities and counties to ban something that is legal in this state. I have no idea, none at all, why the House Judiciary Committee voted to allow this. Hopefully the provision will be stripped out again.

If not, the Senate should vote the bill down. And the Governor should veto it, should a bill allowing a ban on medical marijuana dispensaries somehow pass both the state House and Senate. 

I ask Salem-area leaders about climate change

"Science isn't political."

I applauded inwardly when I heard Jane Lubchenco utter those words yesterday at a Salem City Club meeting. 

She mostly talked about her experience as Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adminstration (NOAA). Lubchenco was appointed by President Obama in 2009 and served until 2013. Currently she is a Professor of Biology and Zoology at Oregon State University.

After the meeting I waited around for a chance to talk with Dr. Lubchenco. My question for her related to what I said recently in Time for public officials to "come out"...about climate change.

What is more important for life on Earth than having a planet that supports the sort of human living we've been accustomed to? And not just for we who are living today, but also our children, grandchildren, and generations to come.

So I'm planning to ask our local public officials, elected and appointed, whether they agree with the scientific consensus that (1) global warming is occurring, and (2) humans are mostly responsible for this. I might also ask those who answer "yes" if they think we need to do something about global warming/climate change.

Since Lubchenco mentioned climate change often in her City Club talk, I wanted to ask her if she could think of any reason why local public officials shouldn't be willing to say whether they agree with the scientific consensus about climate change/global warming.

"No," she told me. Which is the answer I expected, since she'd just said that science isn't political.

Science seeks to learn about the nature of shared reality, the world everyone inhabits -- conservatives and liberals, Republicans and Democrats, religious believers and non-believers, everybody.

Lubchenco's talk spurred me to compose a message I'll be sending to Salem-area public officials. And other local leaders: newspaper editors/publishers; Chamber of Commerce executives; corporate and non-profit organization leaders; people running for elected office.

Here's what I wrote.

Dear _______________:

Since you are a Salem-area leader, I'd like to know your answers to three simple questions about climate change.

Here's why: science isn't political.

People can (and do) disagree about all kinds of things. But science offers us a common ground where we can agree on basic facts about the world we share. With that foundation, debates about policy questions can be much more productive.

We can focus much more on "what should be" than "what is." 

I'm deeply concerned about climate change/global warming. In my view, this is an issue that must be dealt with at all levels of society: national, state, county, local, organizational, individual. I'm focused on local. 

If Salem-area leaders are in agreement about the problem, seemingly policies aimed at solutions will be easier to come by. This is why I'm conducting this survey: to learn how you and others view climate change.

I look forward to receiving your reply to this message. A simple "yes," "no," or "not sure" to each question is welcomed. Any other thoughts you would like to add would be extra-welcomed. 

Responses will be made public. Including my own. I'm a "yes," "yes," "yes." However, even though I'm hopeful this will be everybody's response, I realize it likely won't be. Which is fine. Coming to agreement on scientific facts isn't possible unless we know where (and why) we disagree. 

Here are the three questions for you:

(1) Do you believe that global warming is occurring, and is causing the Earth's climate to change in various ways?

(2) Do you believe that humans are mostly responsible for the global warming/climate change that is occurring?

(3) Do you believe that humans need to engage in actions to deal with both the causes of global warming and its detrimental effects on humanity?

Please don't be overly concerned about the precise wording of these questions. There are many ways they could have been phrased.

I just tried to get their meaning roughly right: (1) Is global warming happening? (2) Are humans mostly responsible for it? (3) Should we do something about global warming?

Sincerely,
Brian Hines

Fact-checking Mayor Peterson's 2014 Salem State of the City address

Yesterday Salem's Mayor, Anna Peterson, gave a State of the City address. I didn't go.

I purposely planned my StreetStrider (outdoor elliptical bike) ride at Riverfront and Wallace Marine parks to coincide with Peterson's talk, figuring that it would be much healthier for me to exercise in nature than listen to some political posturing.

Great decision, after reading Mayor Peterson's prepared remarks. There are so many untruths and half-truths in her speech, if I'd been there in person I would have felt like standing up and screaming bullshit!
Download Text of the Salem State of the City speech

Repeatedly.

It'll be fairly easy for me to do a Fact Check thing, since I've been blogging about the issues where Peterson took the most liberties with the truth. Click on the links below if you want more information about what the Mayor got wrong.

After correcting her misstatements, I'll end with -- gasp! -- some praise for a portion of her speech. 

Fact Check 1: Pringle Square will set a "new standard for urban design." 

No, not even close. Peterson needs to get out more. Like, to Portland. Or countless other cities that have been embracing mixed-use development much more strongly than Salem has. 

The City of Salem approved a dreadful Boise Cascade development plan that was much worse than the original plan. Thankfully, citizens rose up and stopped the attempted land grab of part of Riverfront Park, leading to a better proposal from Mountain West Investment.

This still isn't a cutting edge development on Salem's riverfront. Parking. Apartments. Office buildings. A nursing home. Whoopee. But it is a lot better than the first proposal, thanks to citizen activists telling the City "No way!"

Fact Check 2: "We have not forgotten Downtown. Former efforts to spur shopping and entertainment are now boosted by an advisory group that works with [the] City Manager's office to organize First Wednesday's, special promotions and events."

Wow. Mayor Peterson's City Manager, Linda Norris, terminated the City's contract with Salem Downtown Partnership with no warning, and no reason. Norris just took over the funds and equipment and set up her own hand-picked advisory committee.

The committee meets secretively. It doesn't publicize its meetings or release minutes. Downtown businesses weren't asked if they wanted to make a change to the Salem Downtown Partnership. Peterson and Norris just acted unilaterally.

So much for this being a "Collaboration Capitol," another untruth in Peterson's speech. This is the least collaborative administration in City Hall that long-time residents can remember.

Fact Check 3: Downtown parking problems "were not caused by the Parking Task Force that Councillor Bennett and I led. They were not caused by this Council that enacted an ordinance to allow 'park anywhere you like for as long as you like.'"

Huh? Of course those problems were caused by the Task Force and City Council.

That Parking Task Force was dedicated from the outset to installing parking meters in downtown Salem. It never asked downtown small businesses what they thought of the idea. It didn't allow citizens to speak or ask questions at its meetings. 

So citizens stood up against this attempt to ramrod parking meters into downtown. Carole Smith explained why, then she and others involved with Stop Parking Meters Downtown got 9,000 people to sign a petition that would do just that.

The group urged the City Council to put the initiative petition on the ballot so Salemians could have a vigorous open debate about the pros and cons of downtown parking meters. But the City Council voted on its own to make the parking changes.

Now the City is trying to screw up downtown parking so they can go back to their parking meter plan. It isn't surprising that so far 75% of people responding to today's Statesman Journal online poll say the City Council/City are to blame for downtown parking problems.

 

Looks like they aren't buying Mayor Peterson's attempt to shirk reponsibility for the City's decision to end two hour limits, and not enforce the existing ban on downtown employees using onstreet parking while at work.

Fact Check 4: Seismic upgrades to the Civic Center and Library and a new police facility "is not an issue or plan that has been secret or under wraps at City Hall."

Actually, the City indeed has been planning this $80 million project ($128 million including financing costs) in a highly secretive manner. If you don't believe me, check out this reputable source who wrote "How City of Salem planned police facility in secretive manner."

Which happens to be me. 

For a long time even the City Council was kept in the dark about what was going on. A Statesman Journal editorial said, “So far, one flaw is that officials, despite their good intentions, did not do enough to get the public involved from the outset.” Citizens were unable to get information about the police facility plan until it was revealed, full blown, in the fall of 2013.

Peterson also is wrong that building a new police facility at the Civic Center, with expensive underground parking "provides the best return on dollars spent." Salem Community Vision has demolished that untruth.

Now... to a part of Mayor Peterson's speech that I agreed with. 

She is absolutely correct in saying that "corporations today, and the employees of tomorrow are looking for more -- they are looking for quality of life, new entertainment, and recreational opportunities right out their front door. In other words, they are looking for vibrancy."

But I didn't see a big City of Salem presence at last night's terrific talk by urban design expert Gil Penalosa. Penalosa said much the same thing: that many people nowadays can choose where they want to live, either because of the sort of career they have or other reasons.

Quality of life is very important to them. And a big part of that is how walkable and bikable a city is. Bluntly put, Salem sucks in this regard. We are way behind Portland, Corvallis, Eugene, and other Oregon cities.

The City is set on getting further behind, choosing to push for an unneeded, unwanted, and unpaid-for $400-700 million Third Bridge across the Willamette, instead of investing in improving and repairing the infrastructure we already have.

Beautifying and streetscaping downtown would cost a small fraction of that amount. It would vastly improve Salem's quality of life and be an economic stimulus.

Question is, will the Mayor and City Council back up Peterson's lofty quality of life words with concrete action? 

Buddhism explains the "angry white men" phenomenon

Happens to me all the time: I say something to a group of people that makes so much sense and is so eloquent, when I stop talking I expect a standing ovation. (Guess I don't have a self-esteem problem.)

Last Saturday I made some observations about "angry white men" that filled this bill. It was during a meeting of our monthly Salon discussion group.

One of the members, Steve, has been reading Michael Kimmel's book, "Angry White Men: American Masculinity at the End of an Era." Here's part of the Amazon book description:

Kimmel locates this increase in anger in the seismic economic, social and political shifts that have so transformed the American landscape. Downward mobility, increased racial and gender equality, and a tenacious clinging to an anachronistic ideology of masculinity has left many men feeling betrayed and bewildered. Raised to expect unparalleled social and economic privilege, white men are suffering today from what Kimmel calls "aggrieved entitlement": a sense that those benefits that white men believed were their due have been snatched away from them.

Listening to Steve talk about the book, fueled by a powerful mental-mix of strong coffee and a large glass of Oregon Pinot Noir, I suddenly realized the foundational cause of not only white men anger, but that of everybody. 

Including me. 

I get angry frequently. Not frothing mad anger. More like seething resentment anger -- a feeling that stuff is happening which shouldn't be, whether to me or someone else (including society in general). Heck, this is the emotional source of many blog posts. Such as this recent one.

But as self-serving as this may sound, I see a considerable difference between my anger and that of the angry white men described by Kimmel. They are, as noted in another part of the book description, trying to stop the tide of history.

The future of America is more inclusive and diverse. The choice for angry white men is not whether or not they can stem the tide of history: they cannot. Their choice is whether or not they will be dragged kicking and screaming into that inevitable future, or whether they will walk openly and honorably – far happier and healthier incidentally – alongside those they’ve spent so long trying to exclude.

I told the discussion group that it isn't surprising when people who are divorced from reality get angry. After all, reality is hugely stronger than any individual, any group, any nation, any anything that denies what is. 

I cited a book that I'd recently finished reading: "Buddhist Biology: Ancient Eastern Wisdom Meets Modern Western Science." 

The author, David Barash, persuasively argues that both science and Buddhism agree about three important aspects of reality: (1) There is no such thing as an enduring "self" or soul; (2) Everything changes, except the laws of nature that produce the ever-changingness; (3) Interdependence and interconnectedness rules the reality roost.

(See this post from my Church of the Churchless blog.)

Thus it isn't surprising that angry white men are feeling the way they do. They are at odds with reality. And reality has a way of kicking butt. People can scream "this can't be happening!" Yet, if it is real, it is. Deal with it.

Whether someone is an angry white man or anyone else, they're going to be chronically disappointed if they fail to recognize those three above-mentioned truths of science and Buddhism.

There's no enduring "I" inside our heads. There's no way to escape change. There's no entity that stands alone unto itself. Everything and everyone is part of a complex, interrelated, ever-changing river of reality that never stops flowing. 

Angry white men want to stop the music, freeze the dancing, keep culture as it was in the not-so-good old days. 

Which isn't possible.

Societies evolve, like everything else. There's nothing wrong with wanting to try to change things; this is a part of ever-changing interconnected reality: self-less beings are drawn to act in certain ways by causes and effects beyond their understanding or control.

Staying calm when things don't go the way we want them to, though, seemingly is possible. Such is a teaching of Buddhism. Along with common sense as expressed in the Serenity Prayer:

God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
The courage to change the things I can,
And wisdom to know the difference.

(I'd leave out "God," substituting "reality.")

Time for public officials to "come out"... about climate change

Global warming is causing massive changes to the Earth's climate. Humans are responsible for most of the warming. 

This is the consensus of 97% of the world's climate experts. Anyone who doesn't take these facts seriously is a danger to humanity.

Here's a quote from Elizabeth Kolbert's book, "The Sixth Extinction: An Unnatural History." I found it in an Amazon reader review when I was trying to decide whether to order the book. (I did order a copy.)

"If you want to think about why humans are so dangerous to other species, you can picture a poacher in Africa carrying an AK-47 or a logger in the Amazon gripping an ax, or, better still, you can picture yourself, holding a book on your lap."

Actually, the problem of extinction is even worse than this.

Humans are not only causing countless other species to go extinct, matching the record of past global disasters like a large asteroid hitting our planet, our trashing of the environment through carbon pollution and other activities threatens Homo sapiens as well. 

We need to protect many species to help our own.

It is often forgotten how dependent we are on other species. Ecosystems of multiple species that interact with one another and their physical environments are essential for human societies.

These systems provide food, fresh water and the raw materials for construction and fuel; they regulate climate and air quality; buffer against natural hazards like floods and storms; maintain soil fertility; and pollinate crops. The genetic diversity of the planet’s myriad different life-forms provides the raw ingredients for new medicines and new commercial crops and livestock, including those that are better suited to conditions under a changed climate.

For this reason and many others, human-caused climate change is the biggest problem facing humanity. Yet a disturbingly large number of people either refuse to admit that global warming is happening, or deny that humans are the cause.

Even more disturbing: among these global warming skeptics and deniers are public officials who have a big say in governmental policy decisions that affect our carbon footprint (huge, and trampling on the environment more powerfully with every passing day).

It's important for citizens to know who they are. It's long past time for a "coming out" on global warming. Public officials need to be transparent about what they know and believe on this super-important issue. 

I don't care about their sexual orientation, drug/alcohol use, or other personal habits and characteristics. I do care about whether they agree with the scientific consensus on global warming. 

After all, what is more important for life on Earth than having a planet that supports the sort of human living we've been accustomed to? And not just for we who are living today, but also our children, grandchildren, and generations to come.

So I'm planning to ask our local public officials, elected and appointed, whether they agree with the scientific consensus that (1) global warming is occurring, and (2) humans are mostly responsible for this. I might also ask those who answer "yes" if they think we need to do something about global warming/climate change.

Tonight I tried this notion out on a group of friends. 

Most thought it was a good idea. Maybe a great idea. (Probably was me who said that.) But one person said, "Many public officials won't respond to you. What will you do then?"

My response: "Declining to openly agree with an essentially indisputable scientific fact would be an act that speaks for itself. It would be like saying no comment to someone who asked if they believed in gravity or electromagnetism. Shunning an opportunity to agree with a scientific consensus reveals a person's mindset almost as clearly as if they directly stated their disagreement with that consensus."

I'm looking forward to learning how Salem's Mayor, City Manager, Public Works Director, and City Councillors respond to my simple two or three question survey. Also, how the Marion County Commissioners and other top county officials do.

Hopefully they are in tune with one of the most important findings of modern science. If not, some education is in order. And some kicking out of office, if the educating isn't embraced.

Marion County and City of Salem stuck in "Reefer Madness" fantasy land

Here's another great example why the Republican Party, and right-wing conservatism is general, is fading away as a cultural force.

The conservative-led Marion County (Oregon) Board of Commissioners and Salem City Council are talking up bans -- or severe restrictions -- on medical marijuana clinics. 
Download Marion County takes stances against marijuana clinics
Download Salem City Council hears about medical marijuana dispensary plan

Wow. 

Medical marijuana is legal in Oregon. So are clinics where people with a medical marijuana prescription can buy their medicine without going onto the black market or growing their own (tough to do if you're a cancer patient dealing with chemotherapy).

Further, most knowledgable observers of the pot legalization scene are predicting that Oregon soon will join Washington and Colorado as a state that has given the OK to recreational marijuana use.

Yet in the behind-the-times Salem area, we have leading politicians like county commissioner Patti Milne tooting the long-discredited Reefer Madness horn.

The Marion County Board of Commissioners has passed a resolution opposing the legalization of marijuana and the operation medical marijuana clinics.

The resolution, which passed Wednesday, sets a direction for county policy and could lead to an outright ban on medical marijuana clinics in Marion County.

“We believe there is a detrimental effect to the health, safety, and, quite frankly, the peace of our community,” said Marion County Commissioner Patti Milne.

Yeah, right. Those cancer patients and post-traumatic-stress Iraq war veterans needing to imbibe some marijuana to feel better are a major threat to the peace of our community. Not.

If anyone needs a reason not to vote for Milne in her recently-announced bid to run against State Senate President Peter Courtney, this is a good one. Along with her role in the Courthouse Square debacle and a string of votes in favor of trashing the environment and paving over farmland. 

I've heard that Salem Mayor Anna Peterson also is adamantly against both medical and recreational marijuana use. 

Talk about being on the wrong side of history. Which, of course, is a hallmark of today's conservatives. 

Gay marriage. Immigration reform. Marijuana legalization. Alternative transportation. Mixed-use urban design. Reducing carbon pollution.

Most people are on board with these evident cultural trends.

But locally too many of our politicians are belted-in to a fantastical Way Back Machine -- which they believe will allow them to preserve the not-so-good old days and prevent a better future from happening.

So, to offer up two examples among many, we get Reefer Madness redux, along with the Freeway Madness of politicians wanting to foist a $400-700 million Third Bridge across the Willamette onto taxpayers when there is absolutely no demonstrated need for one.

Facts are fearful to public officials like Milne and Peterson.

They threaten the tidy interior of closed minds. Believing that medical marijuana clinics are a threat to the health, safety, and peace of Marion County and Salem is a bizarre fantasy.

Fortunately, today a state Senate committee approved a bill that allows cities to regulate, but not ban, marijuana dispensaries. And a measure to send a recreational marijuana legalization bill to voters also has been approved by a committee.

Progress happens. That's why I'm proud to call myself a progressive. Meaning, an optimistic realist. Milne and Peterson can resist cultural change all they want. No matter. Change happens.

Blumenauer rips Drug Policy official on marijuana cluelessness

This should be must-viewing for the Salem City Council and Marion County Board of Commissioners, which are considering ill-advised restrictions on medical marijuana clinics -- totally legal here in Oregon, as recreational marijuana also should be.

There's a lot of ignorance about marijuana among Patti Milne and other county commissioners. Likely also among city councillors. 

Download Marion County takes stances against marijuana clinics
Download Salem City Council hears about medical marijuana dispensary plan

What's needed is honesty, not clueless prevaricating, like a federal Drug Policy demonstrates in this video. Oregon congressman Rep. Earl Blumenauer does a great job holding the guy's feet to the bullshit fire.

 

Salem's "State of the City" not as rosy as Mayor Peterson spins it

Today I heard from someone who had some disagreements with a Statesman Journal preview of Salem (Oregon) Mayor Anna Peterson's upcoming State of the City address. 
Download Salem's spending future

You can read what this person said below. I share his/her skepticism.

Especially regarding Mayor Peterson's attempt at a "united" spin. Actually, no way has she presided over a collaborative, consensus-building, citizen involvement-based administration.

Instead, Mayor Peterson, City Manager Linda Norris, Public Works Director Peter Fernandez, and most city councillors have done their best to ignore public input, facts, and expert advice in favor of top-down bureaucratic policy-making.

Five notable examples: 

(1) City's Shade Tree Advisory Committee and urban arborist recommend against cutting down five large healthy downtown trees. Fernandez does it anyway, after making a backroom deal with the US Bank Regional President who is incoming Chamber of Commerce president. Protests erupt, understandably. So much for "united." 

(2) City establishes a task force to consider the wisdom of downtown parking meters. The task force never asks downtown small businesses what they think of the idea, and doesn't allow citizens to speak at its meetings. A quickly-organized citizen initiative gets 9,000 signatures to ban downtown parking meters. City backs off and accepts the initiative. So much for "united."

(3) City wants to build a $400 - $700 million third bridge that is unneeded, unwanted, and unpaid for. Citizen testimony at a recent bridge planning meeting was 100% opposed to this boondoggle. The Salem City Council is set to approve a new bridge design that now displaces some 60 homes and businesses without holding a public hearing. People are outraged. So much for "united."

(4) City secretively spends four years planning to spend $80 million on a new police facility and Civic Center renovations. Public officials never ask citizens what they think of the proposal until it is finally revealed last year. Right away, building experts point out ways to save $30 million on this poorly-thought-out plan. Community calls for a better way. So much for "united." 

(5) City approves a Boise Cascade property redevelopment plan that requires a land grab of part of Riverfront Park. Otherwise, the developer won't have access to land on the other side of railroad tracks, where large apartment buildings are planned. Intense opposition to using the Carousel parking lot as an access road erupts. City and developer have to backtrack and come up with a different plan. So much for "united."

So those are my thoughts. Here's what the other person said about Mayor Peterson's State of the City address:

Here's my reaction to parts of this article [in italics]:

Her address this year will be built around the theme 'Salem, stronger, healthier, safer, united."

United? Really? It's hard to remember a time when Salem was less united.

City leadership and ordinary citizens seem to be on opposing sides when it comes to many important issues facing the city: 3rd bridge, new police station, street maintenance fees, cell phone towers, parking meters, etc.

It is belittling to those of us who have been "fighting City Hall" on these and other issues to pretend we aren't out there.

"We’re not like some cities. We don’t deficit spend. We don’t raid from one pot to the other. We cut back when we have to,” Peterson said.

This is a dumb comment, because cities and the state, by law, are not allowed to deficit spend in Oregon. What city is she talking about? Detroit?

The mayor said her speech will touch on the city’s budget, which she described as stable.

Oh really?

The five year forecast predicts the need to reduce the General Fund budget by $6 million in just a couple of years. Does that mean we ignore the problem until we reach the cliff? How are we going to cut that much from the budget when we have already closed two fire stations and reduced hours at our one branch library to 16 hours a week? Maybe she just wants the next mayor to have to deal with that.

In the annual address, Peterson also plans to discuss the diversity of Salem’s residents. She recently created a group called the Mayor’s International Council. “Cultural diversity is kind of the middle name for Salem these days,” Peterson said. The international council will examine issues, such as strengthening relationships among cultural groups and bolstering support for “Sister City” activities.

One out of five Salem residents is Latino. And the Latino population is the fastest growing segment of our population. An even larger percentage of our school age population is Latino. The other ethnic and racial groups in Salem are important, but their numbers are much smaller:

Latino 20.1%
African American 1.5%
Asian 2.7%
Native American 1.5%
Hawaiian/Pacific Islander 1%

For the Mayor to lump Latinos in with the other racial and ethnic groups and use the label "international" for them all denigrates the large and growing influence that Latinos and their culture have on Salem. It continues to marginalize Latinos, a group that is underrepresented in city leadership. It is embarrassing that a group making up a fifth of our population has no representation on the City Council or School Board.

Too bad the article didn't mention the $6,000 video that the Mayor commissioned to tout her success in economic development. Can't wait to see that.

Behold my astounding senior citizen snow shoveling

I am freaking proud of myself. Snow shoveling-wise.

By the powers vested in me by, well, ME, I hereby declare myself the winner of Salem, Oregon's Snowpocalypse 2014 Over 65 Driveway Clearing Championship, Hand-Wielded Snow Shovel Division.

Walking around our neighborhood's streets here in rural south Salem, I saw several other cleared driveways. But tractor tracks showed this was accomplished with a mechanized method. Me, I'm old style.

The past couple of days we've gotten a bit over 9 inches of snow. That's a lot for the mid-Willamette Valley. We've lived out here for 24 years. I can't remember ever needing to shovel this much snow.

Or, ever being as old as I am now (which makes sense).

I used to clear our long driveway with a crappy snow shovel. A few years ago I got this marvel, a Suncast SC530 20-Inch Poly Snow Shovel/Pusher With Ergonomic D-Grip Handle. This shovel rocks. I stick the handle in my gut, then use core and leg muscles to clear a lane of snow.

Repeat. Many, many times.

After about two hours, both today -- 6 inches of snow -- and yesterday -- 3 inches of snow -- our long driveway was shoveled clear. (DId I mention we have a long driveway? The way I'd describe it, is long.)

We have two cars with Blizzak snow tires. Laurel left our HIghlander at the top of the driveway before the snow got really deep. But I wanted to be able to get my Mini Cooper out on the road as soon as possible. Even with Blizzaks, I didn't think Ms. Mini (she's so cute!) was going to handle 6 inches of snow very well.

Plus, I usually do some aerobic and weight-lifting exercising on Fridays and Sundays. So I figured a couple of hours of snow shoveling on Friday and Saturday would substitute for not being able to StreetStride at Minto Brown Park and get to our athletic club.

For sure. See how our driveway curves to the left in the photo above after leaving our carport/garage?

This is where it heads next. But there's even more...

This is the final stretch of driveway. Lake Drive is just over the top of the hill. Each and every mound of snow on both sides of the driveway were put there by me and my snow shovel.

I doubt there are any who would challenge my winning the Salem Oregon Snowpocalypse 2014 Over 65 Driveway Clearing Championship, Hand-Wielded Snow Shovel Division.

Any who would dare to do so, share your own driveway photos, please. Along with a scan of your Medicare card.

I'm proud of myself in large part because not only did I have no problem physically shoveling 9 inches of snow from our driveway (did I mention it is long?), I actually enjoyed myself.

When I walked down from the top of the driveway today, snow shovel and coffee mug in hand, I encountered my wife coming back from a dog walk. "We really need to hire someone to clear the driveway next time it snows," she said.

"What are you talking about?," I told her. "I had fun doing this." 

Well, fun may not be the best word to describe how I feel while shoveling driveway snow. Satisfying might be better.

It's a tough job. I can do it. It's satisfying to start with a single swipe of the shovel, realize I have a long way to go, and then, one push/dump at a time, make that long way progressively shorter. There's a simple Zennish chop wood and carry water feeling to shoveling snow.

If I think about the entire driveway (which, remember, is long), what I'm doing seems crazy.

I really don't have to do it. I could drive the Mini Cooper up and down the driveway after every couple of inches of snow falls, packing the snow down and keeping the driveway drivable. Or I could leave the Mini up by the mailbox along with our other car.

Truth be told, I enjoy clearing the driveway by hand.

It makes me feel real. Shoveling snow is exactly opposite to virtual reality, cyberspace reality, social media reality. There's no abstractions here, no 140 character limit, no wordiness, no pretending to be someone you're not, or someone capable of doing something you really can't do.

Me and the snow, we have an intimate and honest relationship. No bullshit. The snow fell. No problem. That's what it had to do. Me, I want it moved to the side of the driveway. That's what I have to do. Again, no problem.

Except when, as happened today, the mounds of snow pushed to the side on Day 1 interfere with my pushing more snow to the side on Day 2. But I have a system. You've got to have a system with snow shoveling. Especially if you have a long driveway. 

First couple of inches of snow, I clear maximally. This allows me to push aside more inches of snow less maximally. I know how much room our cars need to get up the driveway. About the width of the snow shovel, plus a couple of feet.

So today it worked out that I was only able to push the new snow up to the edge of the mounds of the old snow that I'd cleared yesterday. The cleared area was still wide enough to drive through. Maybe not for a UPS truck; but the snow should melt early next week.

I like how simple snow shoveling is. Including my system for doing it. It allows me to either not think at all, or let my mind wander however it wants to.

For example...

I got to thinking about how, in addition to being able to get my Mini Cooper up the driveway, it makes me feel good to know that an emergency vehicle could get down our driveway. And then, back up.

Such as, I mused, an ambulance. What if my wife or I had a serious medical problem during Salem Snowpocalypse 2014?  Unlikely, but possible. 

We're healthy, Laurel and me, I thought, while shoveling snow. What are the chances one of us would suffer, say, a heart attack? 

Not very great. Though one does hear about older men having a heart attack from engaging in some unusual strenuous physical activity. Like... hmmmm....

Shoveling snow. 

Which I kept doing. While musing about the marvelous existential absurdity of this activity. 

Here I was, toiling away at clearing our driveway of snow so, among other reasons, an ambulance or other emergency vehicle could get down it. But this might be needed because a 65 year old man had decided to spend a couple of hours clearing his driveway of snow.

Sartre and Camus would love this situation.

I went on to ponder the probablility that this 65 year old man would have a heart attack at the very moment, or soon thereafter, he had finished clearing the driveway. Because if the driveway was only partially cleared when he had the heart attack caused, in part, by his desire to make the driveway passable for emergency vehicles, an ambulance still would find it difficult or impossible to get through the remaining snow.

Strangely, while shoveling snow I found these thoughts wonderfully appealing. Life doesn't make sense. Absurdities abound. Nothing to do but...

Shovel snow.

Oregon snowstorm turns our yard into Narnia

WIth a little help from my iPhone app friend, Aviary, I captured the Narnia'ish look of our rural south Salem yard late this afternoon, after about two inches of snow had fallen. 

Original photo below, for realists.

It's been about 23 degrees all day. Not that cold by midwest polar vortex standards, but pretty damn cold for the usually temperate mid-Willamette Valley.

Positive side: for obvious reasons I got motivated this morning to finally exchange the bad battery in our Honda generator for the replacement battery that I'd bought quite a few months ago. 

Amazingly, after the battery had sat all that time, and after the generator hadn't been started for longer than that, I turned the switch on the generator, listened to it crank away for a few seconds, and then fire right up.

Honda generators rock.

Our 7,000 watt model was pretty spendy. But when you live in Narnia, cold snowy winds are blowing, the electricity is out, and so is your well, that Honda generator is worth every penny.

Hasn't happened yet in this storm event. But more snow and maybe freezing rain is forecast for the next few days.

Beautiful display of an Oregon mushroom "forest"

I don't know much about mushrooms. Especially wild ones. But I know beauty when I see it.

Last November my wife, Laurel, snapped these iPhone photos of mushrooms doing their thing after a tree fell on our rural south Salem property.

Most amazing mushroom display I've ever seen. (click image to enlarge)

CBO: Obamacare will let people decide how much they want to work

The title of this blog post is accurate. But you won't see it on Fox News or other right-wing sound machines, which have been screaming falsities today like, "Obamacare to cost 2.3 million jobs over 10 years."

Not true. 

The Congressional Budget Office report that has gotten Affordable Care Act haters into such a mad dog frenzy actually has good news for the country: now that most people have access to affordable health insurance that isn't tied to employment, they have more latitude to decide how much to work. 

Full-time. Part-time. Not at all. 

Matthew Yglesias offers up some fictional, yet realistic, examples.

John is 59, has had a good career as a mechanical engineer, has saved pretty diligently his whole life, and also has a chronic heart condition. He's got the cash to retire early, but he's not yet eligible for Medicare. So he needs to keep working more than he wants to for a few more years. Or at least he would have if not for the Affordable Care Act, which makes it feasible for him to buy insurance on the private market and get a jump start on his fishing plans.

Mary is 27 and pregnant. She'd like to start working part time once the baby is born. But even though her husband's company is doing OK it's too small to provide health insurance to its employees. So the family really needs Mary to put in enough hours to qualify for benefits at her office. That is, they would need her to work full time if not for the Affordable Care Act, whose small-business tax credits are going to let her husband's boss start offering insurance.

Those are good stories, right?

Sure seems so.

Yglesias goes on to point out that the Affordable Care Act kills jobs in the same way that Social Security or Medicare kills jobs. Beneficiaries have more freedom to decide whether to keep working after becoming eligible for these programs. 

It's not really news when Republicans distort facts. Or conjure up their own twisted view of the world.

But I'm glad the Washington Post fact-checker called them out on this issue, giving them three "Pinocchios" -- a signficant factual error. Check out "No, CBO did not say Obamacare will kill 2 million jobs."

Look at this way: If someone says they decided to leave their job for personal reasons, most people would not say they “lost” their jobs. They simply decided not to work.

The CBO, in its sober fashion, virtually screams that this is not about jobs.  (Note the sections in bold face.)

“The estimated reduction stems almost entirely from a net decline in the amount of labor that workers choose to supply, rather than from a net drop in businesses’ demand for labor, so it will appear almost entirely as a reduction in labor force participation and in hours worked relative to what would have occurred otherwise rather than as an increase in unemployment (that is, more workers seeking but not finding jobs) or underemployment (such as part-time workers who would prefer to work more hours per week).”

[to be clear: boldfaced text is what is not happening with Obamacare]

Finally, we should note that the figures (2 million, etc.) are shorthand for full-time equivalent workers — a combination of two conclusions: fewer people looking for work and some people choosing to work fewer hours. The CBO added those two things and produced a hard number, but it actually does not mean 2 million fewer workers. (This is also off a base of more than 160 million people.)

In fact, no one really knows what percentage will leave the work force entirely and what percentage will shift to part-time work, making it difficult to predict how this will shake out in the end.

...Once again, we award Three Pinocchios to anyone who deliberately gets this wrong.

Oregon one of most liberal and non-religious states

This is a big reason why my wife and I can't think of any other state we'd rather live in: "Oregon one of country's most liberal and least religious states: Gallup poll"

From Jeff Mapes at the Oregonian:

Oregon once again has a notable spot on two new charts from Gallup, the venerable polling organization.  The pollster found that Oregonians continue to identify themselves as one of the most politically liberal states in the country -- and one of the least religious.

It's not surprising that Oregon would be at the top of one list and at the bottom of the other.  Numerous studies have found a strong link between religious and political beliefs.

Oregon is listed as tied with Hawaii for being the sixth most liberal state (fifth, if you don't count Washington, D.C., which is probably best compared with other urban areas instead of states).

As it happens, more Oregonians identify themselves as conservative than liberal -- 33.6 percent versus 27.9 percent -- but it's one of the smaller gaps in the country.

And many voters who typically side with the Democrats have rejected characterizing themselves as liberals (that's why most Democratic politicians prefer to call themselves progressives).

Gallup notes that Democrats continue to dominate in states like Oregon because so many voters who identify themselves as moderates tend to side with them.  In Idaho, the third most conservative state after Wyoming and Mississippi, 47.5 percent identify themselves as conservatives -- giving Republicans there a solid base they use to dominate elections in the state.

There is one big glimmer of hope for Oregon Republicans in the Gallup state-by-state polling.  The firm found that President Barack Obama's job approval rating in Oregon is far from being in the top 10 -- in fact, at 45.4 percent, it's slightly below the national average of 46.5 percent.  That suggests Republicans might gain some traction here in continuing to focus their attacks on the new federal health care law, which is so identified with Obama.

One big caveat about Gallup's polling.  It's based on interviews with adults, not registered voters.  My guess is that registered voters would be more likely to suggest that they are conservative or liberal.

Oregon is identified as the fifth least religious state, based on the percentage of adults who describe themselves as very religious.  All told, 31 percent of Oregonians describe themselves as very religious, 26 percent as moderately religious and 43 percent as non-religious.

Oregon has the fifth-highest percentage of adults who put themselves in the non-religious category.  The state's secular culture has been long-standing, with many saying that as people moved west, they became less-attached to religious traditions.  Nevada and Washington are also on the list of states with the highest percentages of non-religious adults and California is just a notch below.

Cafe Yumm! opens in Salem. My yummy! review.

I'm pretty sure today was the Grand Opening of the Cafe Yumm! restaurant at 2755 Commercial Street SE behind the French Press creperie and coffehouse. (Details here.)

I saw a tweet from EatSalem that Cafe Yumm! was open.

So after my Tai Chi class in downtown Salem finished about 6 pm, I eagerly headed home down Commercial.

My wife and I are huge fans of Cafe Yumm!

In November 2011 I blogged, 'Visualize a Cafe Yumm! in Salem, Oregon." 

Hey, my 2007 "visualize" blog post about Trader Joe's worked -- Salem has a store now. So I'm turning my New Age powers into manifesting a Cafe Yumm here.

Must have worked. Since they're here.

First impression upon walking in was very positive. Nice clean modern look, not suprisingly very much akin to the Cafe Yumm! in Bend that we eat at every chance we can.

I had no hesitation in ordering. Always get the same thing, the Southwest Tofu Wrap with a whole wheat tortilla. 

I memorialized my first Salem wrap with a photograph of the take-home receipt before I opened the box.

The Southwest Tofu Wrap was just as good as every other time I've eaten it. I realize that most people aren't vegetarian, like I am, and don't enjoy tofu as much as I do, which is a lot.

Still... give this wrap a try. It's terrific. (Meat-eaters also will find a lot to like at Cafe Yumm!)

Kudos to the Salem Cafe Yumm! staff for getting the crispness of the tortilla and composition of the ingredients just right.

Believe me, since this is what I always get at Cafe Yumm!, I am an expert in the ways the whole wheat tortilla can go awry. Not so much to make the wrap unenjoyable; just enough to make it difficult to eat.

Too crisp, and the wrap tends to fall apart when I bite into it. Too soft, and it is difficult to hold the wrap together (it is substantial; lots of avocado, tomatoes, greens, tofu). A few times it's been way too juicy, leading to the need for numerous beard-cleaning napkins. 

Not this time. This wrap was perfect.

As soon as I bit into it, I realized how much I'd been missing my oh-so-lovable Southwest Tofu Wrap. It just makes me feel so good! As did walking into the newly open Cafe Yumm! I felt like finally, Salem has what Bend, Eugene, Corvallis, and Portland have: a Cafe Yumm! 

We're just as cool as they are! (Well, my thinking wasn't quite as delusional as that.)

My order-taker was friendly and competent. With nobody behind me in line, we had a pleasant conversation about vegetarianism, the OK-ness of eating fish, and the evils of factory farming. I was pleased to see quite a few people dining in the restaurant on a first-day Monday night.

Cafe Yumm! is quite roomy. Larger than it looks from outside. There's another seating area in a nook to the left of the front door.

Great addition to Salem. Thanks for coming, Cafe Yumm! I don't know who is responsible for getting the restaurant open. Whoever you are, my wife and I are deeply grateful to you. We'll be frequent customers.

Almost forgot... I also brought home two tempe skewers, with a tasty dipping sauce. Makes a quick and easy vegetarian meal with a tortilla or rice. Cafe Yumm!'s tofu skewers also are good.

Salem is #15 on Best Places to Live. What gives?

Are you freaking kidding me?

How much of a payoff from the Salem Chamber of Commerce and Tourist Bureau did it take to get the Livability web site to rank this town #15 in 100 Best Places to Live among small and medium cities in the United States? 

The Cherry City of Salem, Ore., earned a cherry ranking on our 2014 list thanks to its many recreational, cultural and natural amenities; easy access to quality and affordable health care; and a population well distributed across age groups to support both.

Twenty-five percent of the 154,637 living in Oregon's capital city are under age 18, and the city has many amenities to suit these children and young families, including a park system of 46 parks covering more than 1,600 acres and still growing. Another popular attraction for kids is A.C. Gilbert's Discovery Village, an interactive children's museum with science-based exhibits throughout three Victorian homes. 

The city also scores well when it comes to educating these kids, too, largely because of its many choices. Salem-Keizer Public Schools is the second-largest public school system in the state, enrolling more than 40,000 students throughout 65 schools. Parents opting to send their kids to private schools have many options, as well.

Salem is home to the first university in the West, Willamette University, which enrolls approximately 1,800 students, as well as Corban University, an independent Christian college. Then there's Western Oregon University in Monmouth, which is about 20 minutes from town, and an hour's drive to Portland State University or University of Oregon in Eugene. Oregon State just more than two hours away in Bend.

It's pretty clear that the Livability staff hasn't actually been to Salem, or likely to many/most of the other 99 cities they recommend. The rankings are based on statistical criteria. Notice how there is nothing in the description above that couldn't be learned from a Wikipedia perusal.

(Note to LIvability: Oregon State University is in Corvallis, not Bend. I guess your quick Googling in the course of writing Salem's description turned up a mention of a satellite campus in Bend.)

I was bemused by the photo of Salem shown next to our #15 ranking. Whoever took it had one heck of a powerful telephoto lens up in an airplane, or whatever. Makes it look like Salem is nestled at the foot of snow-capped mountains. 

Skiers, make an airplane reservation! Oh, forgot, you can't. Salem doesn't have an airport with actual scheduled airline service.

Kelly Williams Brown's Super Bowl Etiquette Guide

Ah, I remember the days when Kelly Williams Brown was a reporter/columnist for the Statesman Journal newspaper here in Salem. 

You've come a long ways, Kelly. By leaving Salem.

Brown's "Adulting" book is a huge hit. And her Daily Beast pieces are marvelous. Today's offering is "Your Super Bowl Etiquette Guide From Clothes to Food to What Not to Say."

Here's a few of the Q & A's.

Q: How many alcoholic beverages should one consume during the Super Bowl?

A: Just follow this handy formula:

(H+1) X (I-A)

Where H stands for the amount of drinks required for a noticeable hangover, plus one, times the difference between how you wish the game was going (I) and how it is actually going (A). If you are Jim Harbaugh, you may drink to blackout.

Q: I plan on consuming marijuana during the game because, as every single person on the planet has noted, this is the Weed Bowl. What are some stupid puns I don’t need to make?

A: All of them. There is no need to say things like, “Heh, THIS is a real super bowl!” while triumphantly holding a bong shaped like a dragon skull aloft. And while The Daily Beast cannot condone illegal drug consumption, and must ask you to rethink your choices … if you are hosting this sort of party, be sure to double all recipes.