HinesSight

Photos of Salem Bike Boulevard Advocates "slow roll" ride

Yesterday I tossed my folding Bike Friday Silk into the back of my two-door Mini Cooper (try that with a regular bike) and headed off to Englewood Park in north Salem for a Salem Bike Boulevards Advocates Slow Roll ride to Riverfront Park. 

Living as I do in a rural area outside the Salem city limits, I don't ride my bike much on city streets. So I was eager to take part in a ride with people who knew a lot about urban cycling. I liked how the ride was described:

The group will go at a slow, comfortable pace for everyone. All ages and abilities are welcome and encouraged to come. This will be a fun ride for anyone, including those who want to bike more, but are concerned about riding with traffic. Bring your bicycle and any questions you might have about bicycling in Salem.

We met up under the fir trees in Englewood Park. Before we headed off, the ride leader clued us in to bike hand signals and how we'd communicate the presence of cars ("car back, "car front") and hazards like potholes or glass in the street (point at it). 

The leaders were very careful with the group, which numbered close to thirty people on the ride to Riverfront Park. (Some folks rode back on their own.)

This being Salem, not exactly the most bike-friendly town in Oregon, early on a driver "treated" us to a swear word and some other insults when he had to wait -- oh, the horror! -- for a few extra seconds at an intersection as a bunch of happy cyclists used the public streets that, apparently, the driver wrongly thought were only for vehicles. 

Salem doesn't have many dedicated multi-use paths outside of city parks. But we enjoyed the short path along 12th Street.

A child was towed in the bike trailer and a dog ran alongside his owner on a leash. It was great to be part of such a diverse cycling group, age-wise. I must have been the oldest. Unless the dog was ten, and I multiply the canine age by seven.

Here we are, crossing Front Street into Riverfront Park. A large group of cyclists is common in Portland, Eugene, and other cities where more people bike. One of the goals of this ride was to show people in Salem that, yes, a lot of people in this town also ride bikes. 

And many more would, for sure, if Salem had better bike infrastructure: slow speed bicycle boulevards, protected bike paths, and such. Salem Bike Boulevard Advocates is doing a great job pushing for this. With three new bike-friendly City Councilors recently elected, hopefully this will speed up the process of improving Salem's bikeability.

I pedaled down to the Willamette slough to see how the Minto Brown bike and pedestrian bridge was coming along. Looks like the arches have begun to be constructed.

Here's the Obery family outside the Carousel: Gary, Angela, and their two children. Angela and Gary took the lead in getting Salem Bike Boulevard Advocates off the ground. Give the group a Facebook "like" if you want Salem to be a bike-friendly town. I'd also give Angela's cool bike helmet a like if it had its own Facebook page.

Here we are on Chemeketa Street, starting the ride back to Englewood Park. I asked several experienced cyclists about the "sharrow" (shared lane marking) symbol, which is visible in the lane on the left side of this photo. They echoed what Wikipedia says: "This marking is placed in the travel lane to indicate where people should preferably cycle."

So a cyclist can ride in the middle of the lane, though a card I was given about Oregon Bicycle Laws clarified that "You may occupy an entire lane and ride up to two abreast so long as you don't impede the 'normal movement of traffic.'" In that case, I gather another rule applies: "If you ride at less than the normal speed of traffic then you must ride as far to the right as practicable."

It felt good to be part of a cyclist group.

I've ridden down Chemeketa Street a few times on my own and didn't feel as comfortable as I did yesterday. Strength in numbers, I guess. The more people ride bikes on Salem streets, the more aware drivers will be that they need to watch out for cyclists and give them the respect they deserve.

Ah, the joy of clicking on "unsubscribe" in my emails. Bye, bye, DSCC!

I don't know why I didn't do this a lot sooner -- clicking on "unsubscribe" rather than merely deleting the massive amount of emails that regularly build up in my inbox from Democratic political causes, environmental groups, online businesses I bought something from way back when, and so many other entities I don't care about.

OK, that isn't quite what I mean. 

I care about many of the groups who email me incessantly. I just don't want their pleadings to appear in Apple Mail anymore. Like I said, it's hard for me to understand why it took me so long to do the "unsubscribe" thing. For many years I've been letting the emails flow in like the tide, then disappear with a click of my MacBook Pro's trackpad. 

Until fresh messages would roll in a few days later, when I'd delete them again. 

Psychologically, I believe my problem was misplaced affection. I'd see the name of a group -- ACLU, 350.org, Sierra Club, etc. etc. -- and think, "These are friends of mine. I support what they're doing. Someday I might want to read what they're sending me. Not now, but maybe someday."

Except, that someday rarely, if ever came. So today I began the process of unsubscribing from each and every email list that sent me messages I didn't really want to read.

My most satisfying unsubscribe was the DSCC, Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. Some days, like April 30, I'd get as many as eight freaking messages from the DSCC. Combining the subject headings would create a kind of Irritating Political Fundraising Poem.

For example, starting with the first 7:31 am DSCC message on April 30, and ending with the eighth 8:13 pm message...

I need your help, Brian
Brian!
big update: [time sensitive]
Tomorrow will be too late!
I'm asking personally, Brian
Republican TAILSPIN
numbers you NEED to see [GRAPHIC]
this is our last email, Brian: 

DSCC guys, I share your goal -- getting control of the Senate back in Democratic hands. But really... tomorrow won't be too late. This is May. The election is in November. I'll be glad to contribute some money to you. When I feel like it. Your constant appeals for money aren't appealing. So your "unsubscribe" link was a welcome sight.

I found the various unsubscribe styles intriguing. Most businesses handled this in a straightforward way. I'd click on "unsubscribe," then a web page would pop up in Safari that said You've been unsubscribed. I appreciated the simplicity.

Some political groups, though, either played the Guilt Game or Are You Sure Game. For example, Alan Grayson for Senate. I have no idea how I got on his email list. I'm not even sure what state he is in. Florida, I think. Anyway, at the bottom of his message, I found:

Should you want to unsubscribe -- and let right-wing Republicans and conservative Democrats like Patrick Murphy win -- then click here.

Well, Alan, I don't want that to happen. But I still clicked on "here." Give me a break. A guy in Oregon who clicks on your unsubscribe link is going to wreck the chances of progressives being elected to the Senate?

Organizing for Action, OFA, the group that sprang out of Obama's 2008 campaign, takes a softer approach when the unsubscribe link is clicked on.

I was met with an invitation to watch a "Before You Go" video. Then was asked to click on an "I'll keep fighting" button. Being a Surrender Bunny in their eyes, I scrolled down further to find that an unsubscribe box had a "Fewer emails" choice pre-selected. I had to change that to "No emails" to do the unsubscribe deed.

Local organizations -- in Oregon or Salem -- weren't affected by my unsubscribe frenzy. I feel much more of a connection with political, environmental, and social justice groups in my home state/city. 

But damn, it sure felt good to make a start at reducing the number of unwanted emails I get from other groups. I guess for a long time I figured that it was just easier to delete the messages than to unsubscribe from them. And indeed, some groups make you jump through several unsubscribe hoops. 

Hopefully my email inbox will start looking more manageable soon. I'm sort of expecting to receive some "We've missed you, Brian" messages, though. Believe me, the feeling won't be mutual.

I'm an Oregonian who votes by mail. Everybody should.

It's a no-brainer is an overused phrase. But it sure fits when it comes to vote by mail.

In 1998, Oregon, where I live, became the first state in the country to conduct all elections by mailed ballots. Since, Washington and Colorado have followed suit.

(Coincidentally, or maybe not, along with Alaska these three states also are the only ones to legalize recreational marijuana. So not only can residents of Oregon, Washington, and Colorado vote in the privacy of their own homes, we can also do so while smoking pot. Sweet!)

Having moved to Oregon in 1971, I've experienced both ways of voting: (1) going to a polling place on election day, standing in line, and voting in a cubicle; and (2) getting a ballot in the mail several weeks before election day, filling it out whenever I want, and mailing it in.

Believe me, voting by mail is way better. Us Oregonians can't understand why the whole country doesn't do it. There are no real drawbacks and plenty of positives. 

I've never encountered anyone in this state who longs for the old way of voting.

Sure, voting by mail costs you a first class stamp. But lots of people drop off their ballots at a collection box. Many like to do this on election day. Me, I fill out my ballot and mail it in as soon as possible. This gets me off the list of people who receive phone calls from candidate campaigns asking, "Have you voted yet?"

Here's a report from the Marion County Elections Office showing ballot return rates in the recent May 17 primary election. (Marion County is where Salem, Oregon's capital, is located.)
Download 5-17-16 Ballot Return Rate

The final Marion County return rate was 49%.

Thirty-four percent came in gradually during the two weeks prior to election day; fifteen percent came in on May 17, election day. Most of the day-of-election ballots were dropped off, since there's plenty of warnings not to mail your ballot even a week before election day, because of the risk of the USPS not delivering it in time.

(In Oregon, all ballots have to be received by 8 pm on election day. In Washington state, they have to be postmarked by election day.)

Just about the only halfway reasonable supposed drawback to vote by mail that I've heard is the ability to cast your ballot several weeks ahead of election day. Some people argue that this prevents early voters from considering late-breaking information about a candidate.

Well, I've never had regrets about who I voted for two weeks before election day. And many states have some form of early voting, including the ability to cast an absentee ballot. So this seems like a very weak argument against vote by mail.

Phil Keisling was Oregon's Secretary of State from 1991-98. His recent piece in Washington Monthly, "Vote From Home, Save Your Country," discusses the excellent reasons to have vote by mail everywhere. Higher voter turnout is one of them. 

In 2014, Oregon’s active voter turnout rate was 70.9 percent—23 percentage points higher than the national average—despite having no hotly contested top races. Colorado, which had both a close Senate and governor’s race, logged a 71.9 percent ARV rate in its debut UVBM election. Washington State had no U.S. Senate or governor’s race in 2014, but its 54 percent ARV turnout still handily beat the national average. (In 2010, thirty-eight of Washington’s thirty-nine counties used all mail ballots, and its 71.2 percent rate that year was second only to Oregon’s.)

Voter fraud is virtually non-existent in Oregon, just 13 cases since 2000. That's less than one a year. 

My ballot has my name and address on it. I sign the envelope that the ballot is returned in. My signature has to match the one that is on file with the elections office. When my ballot is received, I get an email telling me this:

Hello Brian Hines,

Welcome to Marion County Clerk - Elections Track Your Ballot.

Your ballot for the November 2015 Election has been accepted and is being processed for counting. Thank you for voting! If you have any questions call 503-588-5041.

Visit http://www.co.marion.or.us/co/elections for more election information.

Bill Burgess
Marion County Clerk

So get with it, you 47 states other than Oregon, Washington, and Colorado that don't let citizens vote by mail. The only reason not to do this is to suppress voter turnout. Which appears to be why Republican/Red states are reluctant to have vote by mail.

Ooh, scary! Lots of people voting! Democracy!

Well, be even more afraid of Oregon, because we also have automatic voter registration when people register with the Department of Motor Vehicles ("motor voter" law). Since January, more than 50,000 new voters have been registered in Oregon this way. 

And then they can vote by mail. Making it easy to vote... works here in Oregon. The rest of the country should give it a try.

Crushing disappointment leads me to channel my Inner Trump and Buddha

Well, I can chalk up another soul crushing moment: a third consecutive rejection of my TEDx Salem speaker application -- which I described in "Free will isn't. Existence is" My hoped-for TEDx Salem talk.

The rejection letter reminded me of those I got from publishers back in the days when I was shopping around book manuscripts, before I discovered the Joy of Self Publishing. A polite way of saying, Get lost, loser.

Dear Brian,

We appreciate your proposal for presenting a talk at TEDxSalem.

We received a record amount of applications this year making our decision incredibly difficult.

We regret to inform you that your proposal was not selected for this event.

Please know that this decision was a difficult one. Our all-volunteer selection committee spent many weeks reviewing, discussing and debating the submissions to select the proposals which best suited our event.

We wish you every personal and professional success, and hope you to see you in January.

Sincerely,
The TEDxSalem Speaker Committee

But, hey, it's tough for me to feel that I was screwed over when the topic of my talk was how free will is an illusion. And I've always got the back-up plan that I talked about in my previous post. 

If nothing else, another TEDxSalem rejection will add to my Tortured Artist (or Misunderstood Genius) resume.

In my old age, well, more accurately, my even older age, I can picture myself sitting at the end of a bar, or better, an Oregon cannabis smoking lounge (once they're legal), drowning my tortured artist/misunderstood genius woes with mind-altering substances, telling whoever will listen about my brilliant ideas that have been rejected by an uncaring world not yet ready for The Truth As Known By Me.

I readily admit, however, that I've been having a battle between my Inner Trump and Inner Buddha. Each has been speaking to me inside my head.

Inner Trump: "Brian, TEDx Salem are a bunch of nothings. Little Pitiful TEDx Salem, not even a real TED talk place, just some wanna-be's in So-Lame, Oregon. Your idea for a talk was BIG, so big, so totally fucking big they couldn't grasp it in their minuscule minds. So let it go, man. You're the winner. They're the losers. Screw them.

Inner Buddha: "Brian, you must feel boundless compassion toward the good-hearted TEDx Salem folks. They are sentient beings trying to bring more love, peace, and understanding into the world. Lacking selfhood, just as you do, just as we all do, the Speaker Committee is working in accord with the dharma and karma of this everchanging world.

I'm somewhere in-between Trump and Buddha, I guess. Assuming there's an "I" inside me somewhere. Guess I should re-read part of my TEDx Salem speaker application. 

While many people will initially feel chilled when the comforting blanket of illusory free will is taken away by modern science, the warmth of a philosophically unarguable proposition remains: Existence is.

Almost certainly there is no independent conscious will guiding things on either the cosmic or individual level. "Stuff just happens" is a pithy three word encapsulization of the best 21st century understanding of both the world outside and inside of our heads.

But with this realization comes peace of mind, love, interconnectedness, awe at the endless workings of the laws of nature via cause and effect. Once our mind is blown by the fact, "Free will doesn't exist," we are open (not free!) to explore the many positive implications of this revolutionary worldview.

"Listen, Liberal" is a must-read book for progressives

I'm finding my progressive views being challenged by Thomas Frank's new book, "Listen, Liberal: Or, What Ever Happened to the Party of the People?"

He's the author of "What's the Matter With Kansas?" which took shots at Republicans. Now he's aimed his considerable rhetorical and intellectual skills at Democrats.

To great effect. 

I'm about halfway through with the book. Though I'm still a Hillary Clinton supporter in this year's presidential primary contest, I can now better understand why Bernie Sanders' supporters feel like the Democratic Party has screwed over ordinary people. 

I couldn't resist peeking at the last pages of "Listen, Liberal." As suspected, Frank doesn't cut Democrats any slack in his conclusions.

Now, all political parties are alliances of people with disparate interests, but the contradictions in the Democratic Party coalition seem unusually sharp. The Democrats posture as the "party of the people" even as they dedicate themselves ever more resolutely to serving and glorifying the professional class.

Worse: they combine self-righteousness and class privilege in a way that Americans find stomach-turning. And every two years, they simply assume that being non-Republican is sufficient to rally the voters of the nation to their standard. This cannot go on.

Agreed. 

This is why I've come to feel that if Clinton is the Democratic presidential nominee, as she almost certainly will be, infusing her policy positions with a Big Dose of Bernie will be the best course for both this country and her campaign against Trump. 

Not that Sanders has got everything right. But I've read enough of Frank's book to feel convinced that much of what Democrats have done over the past few decades has been misguided -- even though it seemed justified at the time. (Frank himself admits that he has changed his views over the years.)

I want to finish "Listen, Liberal" before I weigh in on Frank's overall conclusions.

So far, I think his general viewpoint is right on: Democrats have been, and are, way better than Republicans at standing up for ordinary people, the "99%," but still -- in many ways us Democrats have failed the non-professional, non-creative class, non-kale eating/latte drinking citizens of this country.

A few things are bothering me about what I've read so far, though. Frank has a habit of criticizing Democratic policy-makers for doing this-and-that without making much of a case for an alternative approach. 

For example, he castigates President Bill Clinton for assuming that globalization was akin to a force of nature that couldn't be stopped, so the United States needed to adjust to the trend as best we could. Hence, NAFTA and other trade pacts.

Question is, though, how else could this country have dealt with globalization? Trade wars, higher tariffs, and such aren't exactly recipes for economic success. Further, globalization has helped hundreds of millions of people in other countries escape extreme poverty.

Sure, much needs to be done to make their working conditions more fair and equitable. And those hurt by the loss of manufacturing jobs in this country need more than a (Bill) Clintonesque, "The world we face today is the world where what you earn depends on what you can learn." (direct quote in the book)

But globalization is a ship whose course is pretty much set. Democrats need to adjust important details about where the ship is heading, while recognizing that business is going to be increasingly conducted across national borders -- and this is a good thing, overall. 

I also am finding Frank's critique of "new urbanism" folks like me to be a bit off-putting.

Yes, it isn't enough to have cities with marvelous bike paths connecting mixed use areas with art galleries, coffee houses, restaurants, and other attractions for those with enough disposable income to enjoy these amenities. However, there isn't an inherent contradiction between a city being "cool" and being "socially equitable." 

Meaning, we can take care of the less fortunate in this country while also making communities in the United States much more livable. European countries have shown that social democracy and livability go well together. Bicycling isn't just for hipsters; it also is a low-cost, green way to get around. 

In general, though, I like Thomas Frank's style and substance. He presents a way of looking at the Democratic Party which is making me rethink the history of the Clinton years, and onward. These two paragraphs are typical of Frank's blunt prose:

On the financiers, the real Clinton legacy came down to four words: Grab what you can. For them, there were bailouts and trade deals that protected their interests and tax cuts and a timely shot of "liquidity" whenever stock markets seemed to be flagging. And a little deregulation should the laws of the land not meet with their favor.

But the poor needed to learn discipline. That seems to have been one of the ideas behind NAFTA: People employed in manufacturing had to accept working harder for less or else watch their jobs depart for Mexico. Discipline was the point of the '94 crime bill too: The poor were to live in a state of constant supervision where there was "zero tolerance" for those who stepped out of line. Mercy was to be a luxury item now, a thing reserved for those who could make big donations to the Clinton presidential library. 

OUCH! Anyone who thinks my political blog is snarky, read Frank's book for some real snark. 

What Trump's triumph tells us about the nature of reality

Lots of people are talking about what Donald Trump's triumph -- he looks certain to be the G.O.P. presidential nominee -- means for the future of the Republican Party, America, and the world.

To me that stuff is interesting. But I've got my philosophical sights set much higher: on what Trump's ascendancy tells us about the nature of reality. 

More specifically, human reality. So far as I can tell, the rise of Trump doesn't say much about cosmology, dark energy/matter, or how quantum physics and general relativity fit into a theory of everything. 

But having closely watched the Trump phenomenon unfold through my political-junkie eyes for the past however long it has been (seems like forever), I feel qualified to weigh in on its implications for our all-too-human understanding of how the world works.

(1) Life is unpredictable. Obvious statement, right? Hard to argue with. But we Homo sapiens love to believe that we've got a firm grasp on how reality will unfold. Virtually every supposed political expert confidently predicted that Trump would flame out once voters got to know him.

They were wrong. They had no idea. They were surprised by what actually happened. So were we all, pretty much. (I know I was.)

This should have been expected: that expectations were almost certainly going to be wrong. Stock market predictions; long-range weather forecasts; how well a new romantic relationship will work out -- people are crappy at predicting what will happen in the future, by and large.

Yet we keep on believing that next time, we'll get it right. Of course, we probably won't. Life's complex dynamics are way beyond the ability of the human mind to fathom. Also, computer intelligence, so far.

(2) Stories are a sorry substitute for reality. People adore stories. We love telling ourselves Daytime Stories about how the world is, and what will happen in the future. Psychologists and neuroscientists say that story-telling basically is hard-wired into human nature. 

If someone says, "I probably shouldn't reveal this, but did you hear about the embarrassing thing that happened to Sophie on her honeymoon?" we're all ears! Gossip is delicious, even if we're reluctant to admit this. Further, even when happenings can't be linked into a coherent narrative, no problem. 

We'll make up a story that fits what we want to hear.

"Trump is an idiot. He's a political flash in the pan. It won't take long for voters to see through his egotistical bullshit. By spring he'll have dropped out of the race." Except, it's spring, and Trump has won the freaking Republican nomination for president!

There are stories about reality. Then, there is reality. Two different things.

Because we can't know reality as it is, only as how it appears through the imperfect lens of the human mind, we like to make life more coherent than it actually is -- conjuring up stories that tell a pleasing tale about the world. Then, those damn messy facts come along, forcing us to either ignore them, or change our story to fit them.

(We should do the change-our-story thing, but the ignore-them thing is so enticing.)

(3) Nobody is in charge. Not God. Not the "establishment." Nobody. This uncomfortable conclusion fits with my first two points. Life is surprisingly unpredictable, and our stories typically are at odds with reality, because most of us assume that someone or something is purposefully guiding what's happening.

God. Destiny. Gaia. Karma. Cosmic consciousness. The Universe. Unfolding of Our Higher Nature. Whatever...

So we tend to assume that events tend toward a happy ending. Or at least, a meaningful ending. There's got to be a reason this is happening. 

Um, actually, no. Who says there has to be a reason beyond the blind play of cause and effect?

Trump is on track to be the Republican nominee for President of the United States. That's a fact. There is no evidence of a Grand Design behind that fact. In fact (I love that word, fact), every other candidate who believed they were impelled or chosen by God to run for president has dropped out. 

Only chaotic, profane, insulting, irritating, godless (beyond his thin religious facade) Donald Trump is still standing.

I understand the appeal of thinking that there's some ultimate purpose to his presidential candidacy -- he will insure Clinton's election, a Democratic Senate, and progressive Supreme Court nominations, praise Tao!  However, there's no evidence of anyone or anything propelling the 2016 presidential election in any particular direction.

Life just happens. What is, is. 

Just because those words can fit on a bumper sticker doesn't mean they aren't true.

 

Statesman Journal's "Best of the Mid-Valley" awards ripe for ridicule

Like I noted a few months ago in "Is Statesman Journal Best of Mid-Valley contest really about 'best'," the only guaranteed winner in this annual event is... the Statesman Journal.

The biggest winner in the Best of the Mid-Valley contest has to be the Statesman Journal itself. The newspaper sells ads that appear with the category being voted on. Here's a few 2016 screenshots.

...A bit of Googling revealed that "Best of..." contests are a lucrative moneymaker for newspapers. Second Street, which the Statesman Journal is using for its Best of the Mid-Valley contest, talks about this in "How Record Journal Drove $40K in Ballot Promotion."

...I just want to point out that the Best of the Mid-Valley contest is first and foremost a profit center for the Statesman Journal. There's nothing wrong with this. We just need to remember that the winners aren't necessarily the "best" businesses and organizations; they're the ones who were able to generate the most votes.

So I don't take the results of the 2016 Best of the Mid-Valley Statesman Journal Media promotion as a guide to the highest quality restaurants, barber shops, facials, funeral homes, and such. 

Rather, I thumbed through the thick insert in today's Sunday paper -- filled with lots of "Thank You for Voting Us!" ads -- looking for the quirky side of the voting results. Which are made more quirky by the fact that the Statesman Journal rules allow repeated daily votes by the same person:

Readers are permitted to vote in each category once per day. Businesses, institutions and schools may promote the contest in order to gain nominations and/or votes. Competitive advertising, special offers, campaigns are permitted; however, the Statesman Journal, at its sole discretion, reserves the right to exclude from the competition any businesses or individuals that engage in activities intended to "rig" or "fix" the voting process.

This leads to some intriguing results. For example:

Olive Garden getting bronze in Italian Food. As noted in my previous post, I recall Olive Garden winning Gold some years back. Now, I haven't been to Olive Garden for a long time. For a while I regularly ate there. Assuming nothing has changed, and probably nothing has, the fact that Olive Garden supposedly is Salem's third best Italian restaurant fills me with a mixture of culinary sadness and relief that the ratings don't mean much.

South Block Apartments claiming second is a win. Reminding me of some Republican presidential primary spin by certain candidates, a full page South Block Apartments ad on the second page of the newspaper insert has a Silver Winner medallion next to "Thank You for Voting Us Best Apartment Complex." Um, good try, but McNary Heights Apartments beat you. Kudos for clever advertising though, because the "... Best Apartment Complex" part of the ad is more noticeable than the "Silver Winner."

Capital Pawn winning gold in Outdoors Gear Store. OK, maybe I should check out this pawn shop on south Commercial next time I need some hiking shoes, a backpack, or whatever. I'm just surprised that Capital Pawn beat out REI (Bronze winner) and Salem Summit Company (didn't place). In 2015 Salem Summit Company got Gold, Capital Pawn got Silver, and REI got another Bronze. So what changed? Pretty clearly, not the stores, but how many people were drawn to vote for the nominees.

Keizer Station being proclaimed Best Shopping Center. Perhaps I should speak carefully here. But I don't feel like it! I view Keizer Station as the Devil's Spawn of shopping centers. It has to be the ugliest and worst-designed shopping monstrosity on the West Coast. Maybe the Universe. It is impossible to walk from store to store, leaving aside the fact that it is equally impossible to find the store you're looking for. If I need something that only Lowe's has, and the Keizer Station store is the only Lowe's that has it in stock, I will venture into Keizer Station for the briefest visit possible. Otherwise, I stay away.

Best Place to Treat Yourself is Bend's Pronghorn Resort. This is a 2016 Best of the Mid-Valley Staff Pick. Perplexing, since the last time I checked, Bend wasn't in the Mid-Valley. But I suspect advertising money is able to flow from the Pronghorn Resort checking account into the Statesman Journal Media account. Or maybe I'm being too cynical, and Statesman Journal Media staff just sincerely felt that the best place people in Salem should go to treat themselves is in central Oregon.

Burgerville is the Best Reason to Visit Monmouth/Independence. Um, but I'm a vegetarian. Is Burgerville really the best reason to visit these towns?

None of the Best Place to Take Out of Town Guests winners are in Salem. Gold: Silver Falls State Park in Sublimity. Silver: Willamette Valley Vineyards in Turner. Bronze: Brooks Winery in Amity. Well, it is often said (especially by me) that Salem is at the center of good places to visit to the north, south, east, and west. It just would be nice to have more of these places right in Salem.

Lastly, but not leastly... where the heck is the Best Pot Shop category? I searched online and came up with "no result." Geez, this is a horrible oversight. Next year, Statesman Journal Media, next year. It's a marijuana must.