Salem Political Snark

Salem, it's OK to reinvent yourself. Don't cling to the past.

During my 40-year tortured relationship with Salem -- love you! hate you! let's never part! divorce time! -- here's one of the things that bugs me the most about the town I both can't leave and can't be totally happy with.

Salemians (the obviously proper word for people who live here) tend to expect that our city's future should be like the past, only more so. Conservatism runs rampant, even when this isn't of the political variety. Bold visions of what could be are shunned in favor of sticking with an embrace of what has been.

Individuals frequently reinvent themselves. So can cities.

But this takes the same sort of willingness to let go of the past as is evidenced by someone who changes careers, adopts a different outlook on life, says goodbye to a longterm relationship that isn't working any more, alters their physical appearance markedly, takes up a new creative pursuit with unbridled passion, or any other sort of this is the new me! activity.

Salem's previous Mayor, Anna Peterson, liked to say this town was a "collaboration capital." Aside from this being not really true, I'd much prefer that Salem be known as an "innovation capital." 

We're often the last to get on board a Trend Train that other bolder cities have embraced years ago.

Whether it be Uber/ride sharing, Airbnb/home sharing, tiny houses/accessory dwelling units, an environmental/global warming action plan, homelessness/affordable housing initiatives, or whatever, all too often we follow belatedly in the footsteps of other municipalities rather than being among the first to venture into new enhanced-livability territory.

Many millions of dollars have been spent planning for a billion dollar boondoggle -- a third bridge across the Willamette River. Alternatives that are both vastly more creative and hugely less expensive were rejected because building a bridge, pretty much like the existing ones (a bridge is a bridge), has been done before, so let's do it again. 

Ditto with City of Salem policies that primarily encourage sprawl rather than dense mixed-use downtown development. Hey, subdivisions and big box stores on the edge of town were Big Ideas -- albeit decades ago! -- so let's keep on doing what we're doing regardless of whether it makes any sense.

Case(s) in point: City officials don't allow brewpubs downtown, apparently because -- shock!-- brewpubs brew beer in addition to selling it. And City officials don't allow businesses that sell marijuana to be located downtown. So tourists/visitors who come to downtown Salem expecting to sample some quintessential Oregon offerings, brewpubs and cannabis emporiums, will have to go to some other more with-it city. 

Also, downtown could get a marvelous makeover through a full-blown creative streetscape project, but City officials seem determined to make this as blandly "off the shelf" as possible rather than transformative. I keep hearing, "We can't do anything about major downtown streets like Liberty and Commercial because current traffic patterns would be disrupted."

Well, that's the freaking point! 

Change. Innovation. A fresh vision. Reinvention. Breaking with a past that doesn't meet Salem's needs in favor of a way-more-attractive future.

Here's a passage that I like a lot in Yuval Noah Harari's new book, Homo Deus: A Brief History of Tomorrow. Harari is a historian with a wonderfully creative view of how things were, are, and could be. 

Science is not just about predicting the future, though scholars in all fields often seek to broaden our horizons, thereby opening before us new and unknown futures. This is especially true of history. Though historians occasionally try their hand at prophecy (without notable success), the study of history aims above all to make us aware of possibilities we don't normally consider.

Historians study the past not in order to repeat it, but in order to be liberated from it.

Each and every one of us has been born into a given historical reality, ruled by particular norms and values, and managed by a unique economic and political system. We take this reality for granted, thinking it is natural, inevitable, and immutable. We forget that our world was created by an accidental chain of events, and that history shaped not only our technology, politics, and society, but also our thoughts, fears, and dreams.

The cold hand of the past emerges from the grave of our ancestors, grips us by the neck and directs our gaze towards a single future.

We have felt that grip from the moment we were born, so we assume that it is a natural and inescapable part of who we are. Therefore we seldom try to shake ourselves free and envision alternative futures.

For sure. Few people are doing this in Salem, especially at City Hall. 

"More of the same" is the safe slogan that keeps money, power, and energy flowing in ways that are no longer working well for Salemians. There's no overarching vision of what our town could and should become, just stuttering steps in different directions that don't add up to any concerted productive movement. 

Hopefully things will change in this town. Otherwise we will continue to be viewed as So-Lame with considerable justification by other cities which are better are recognizing the value of pursuing alternative futures. 

Pluralism -- fox'y rather than hedgehog'y -- is what Salem (and the nation) needs

We live in a polarized political world, both locally here in Salem and nationally. This is extremely bothersome.

There's no way a city or a country can thrive when roughly half the population is viewed by the other half as worthy of disdain, because they hold views opposed to a supposedly Obviously Clearly Correct position.

Today I finished reading Stuart Firestein's book, "Failure: Why Science is So Successful." In a concluding chapter Firestein praises pluralism. Specifically value pluralism, a notion promulgated by philosopher Isaiah Berlin. He writes:

Berlin's value pluralism was at once far more radical and more constrained than either relativism or subjectivism. It was not "anything goes" but "many things go" --or better, "many chosen things go." Berlin claimed that there were values that were both good and incomparable, or, to use his better word, incommensurable.

That is, two or more things could be valuable or good, and not be measurable against each other, nor could one decide between them on a purely rational basis. Worse, they may even be in conflict. Liberty and privacy might be an example we struggle with today.

...Berlin essentially denies that there is a single correct way to do or see any human activity and asserts that sometimes the multiplicity will create rational or logical inconsistencies. Live with it. Live well with it. 

Berlin's most well-known piece of writing is "The Hedgehog and the Fox." Here's how the publisher describes the essay.

"The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing." This ancient Greek aphorism, preserved in a fragment from the poet Archilochus, describes the central thesis of Isaiah Berlin's masterly essay on Leo Tolstoy and the philosophy of history, the subject of the epilogue to War and Peace. Although there have been many interpretations of the adage, Berlin uses it to mark a fundamental distinction between human beings who are fascinated by the infinite variety of things and those who relate everything to a central, all-embracing system. 

We need more foxes and fewer hedgehogs. Firestein is focused on science in his book, but he briefly talks about the problem of Hedgehogs Gone Wild in our modern politics. I totally agree with this passage. 

Although Isaiah Berlin makes a compelling and impassioned case for pluralism in government and culture, I personally see little of it in modern discourse. Politics has certainly become a winner-take-all game. 

The original ideas of pluralism associated with liberal democracies and legislative deliberations have all but vanished in favor of the fervor of one true path. Voters have become believers, not choosers, and alternatives are dispatched with smug righteousness. 

There are still sides, and one can choose to be this or that (I would have said conservative or liberal, Democrat or Republican, but these terms have lost their meaning and are labels only for belonging to a particular party line that believes completely in its supremacy).

These days joining a side merely means spouting their slogans. There is no good failure, no failure with value, in politics or governing. Thus the mess.

The obvious current example of this is the effort to repeal (and maybe replace) the Affordable Care Act by the Republican Congress.

Even though "Obamacare" was approved on a party-line vote, there were many months of hearings on the Affordable Care Act, lots of back-and-forth debate, and Republicans were able to have well over a hundred amendments to the bill made part of the legislation. This isn't happening with the attempt to repeal Obamacare.

Plus, the Affordable Care Act was based on "Romneycare," the conservative approach to health care reform that was implemented successfully in Massachusetts.

So, yeah, the Affordable Care Act was a fox'y piece of legislation.

It blended disparate ideas into an attempt to improve our health care system that wasn't perfect, but sure was a heck of a lot better than the status quo. Now, it needs to be improved. But instead of doing this, Republicans basically are fixated on a "hedgehog" replacement that slashes Medicaid by hundreds of billions of dollars so tax breaks can be given to the wealthiest Americans.

As Firestein put it, the GOP is acting like believers, not choosers. Republican leaders are trying to legislate on the basis of ideology, not informed choices about the most workable policies.

Likewise, here in Salem the Salem River Crossing (or Third Bridge) is a highly contentious issue.

Supporters of the bridge, such as the Salem Bridge Solutions group, are focused on a simplistic "Build It Now!" cry. I readily admit that the No 3rd Bridge opponents of the Salem River Crossing are equally adamant about their position, but here's the difference:

Opponents of the Third Bridge incorporate ideas of the bridge supporters. They are much more fox-like. They recognize that rush-hour congestion on the two current bridges is a problem. They offer ways to reduce that congestion for a much lower cost than a billion-dollar (including financing costs) new bridge,

As you can surmise, I feel that liberals are, by and large, more pluralistic and fox'y than conservatives -- who tend to be more rigid and committed to a strict right-wing ideology. 

The way to bridge political divides is open, honest, in-depth dialogue. Hearings. Debates. Forums. Fact-based presentations that support certain values. 

When I hear people calling for more discussion with citizens, and more discussion between opposing political sides, before arriving at an important policy decision, this strikes me as a sign that a Hedgehog mentality is on a decline and the Foxes are ascending.

May we have more of this in Salem. And the nation.

Salem Bridge Solutions "goon squad" roughs up West Salem NA meeting

Salem can't tolerate this. "Tough guys" trying to take over a neighborhood association meeting, pushing people around and creating an uproar. 

I've gotten two reports of how supporters of the Salem Bridge Solutions group that wants the Third Bridge billion dollar boondoggle built disrupted last Monday's meeting of the West Salem Neighborhood Association. 

Read the mildly edited reports below. (I've taken out information that could identify the people who contacted me, given that the Salem Bridge Solutions goons are so nastily uncourteous.)

I think you'll agree with me that this kind of behavior can't be allowed to take root in Salem. Or anywhere, for that matter. Salem Bridge Solutions already has very little credibility, given the "alternative facts" it's been spreading. 

The behavior of the Evans brothers, who are leading the group, is totally unacceptable. They need to apologize to the West Salem Neighborhood Association and vow to behave like decent human beings from now on rather than goons.

Read on for the reports about what went on at the WSNA meeting.

 

FIRST REPORT:
Quite an amazing story developing here in West Salem's neighborhood association: The Chamber has put together a goon squad who at the last meeting hi-jacked the meeting and, very stupidly, voted to build a third bridge.

Nothing on where, how much, how in the Hell do we pay for it. Just build one.

The latest meeting was even more interesting as their tactics escalated into what can only be characterized as thuggery. They started off by reviling the chairlady of our planning committee, charging her with conflict of interest - she is a licensed Real Estate agent who ironically is also a committed environmentalist.

Then things got really rough with the Evans brothers shouting at the [West Salem Neighborhood Association] co-chair Steve Anderson for not answering all their email. From there it degenerated into a shouting and shoving match between the Brown Shirts and WSNA officials including our parliamentarian.

Another interesting aspect is the type of thugs the chamber has recruited for their takeover of the association: they clearly are not Chamber members (ie business owners), but possibly employees of members with several looking like pretty rough sorts. Whatever, thought this might be of interest to you, and the story plot is rapidly "thickening" awaiting the Chamber's attempt to actually takeover the association at our annual meeting. 

SECOND REPORT:
Room was set up for 205 people at Roths [originally I had 500 people, but have learned it was 205]. Room filled up. Meeting started at 7.00.

Bridge people interrupted often.

 

After Land Use committee report, they claimed the chair and members have conflict of interest. Want investigation, and new committee members.

 

Very long agenda. At 9.30, the meeting was close to ending. Bridge people wanted to know when new officers & board could be elected.

 

Discussion became heated, with constant interruptions. Chair tried to restore order. Mike Evans [originally I was told it was Steve Evans, but have learned it actually was Mike] was yelling, and going on and on, after being told he was out of order.

 

E.M. Easterly got in his face and yelled “SIT DOWN!!!”. That did not help. The army got on their feet.

 

Chair “adjourned” the meeting. Bridge people didn’t like that, and they rushed the rostrum, trying to grab the mike. A pushing and shoving match. Quite violent. People scattered trying to get out of there.

 

Reminded me of Germany in the 30’s. Never seen anything like that, at a Salem neighborhood. The future looks ugly.

Third Bridge would harm enjoyment of Union Street Pedestrian Bridge

Here's one more of many reasons the Salem River Crossing (a.k.a. Third Bridge) is a really bad idea:

An elevated bridge connection would pass about 10-15 feet over the west end of the Union Street Railroad Pedestrian and Bicycle Trail -- the way-cool non-vehicular bridge used by lots of people, including families with children, every day. 

The No 3rd Bridge folks ask us to consider how the current pleasant experience of walking or cycling across the river will change when an elevated noisy multilane highway is right above people's heads. Here's their recent post about this:

WOULD A HIGHWAY RAMP 10 FEET ABOVE THIS GIRL'S HEAD IN WALLACE MARINE PARK BE NO PROBLEM?
The Federal Highway Administration thinks so. The Salem B. S. [Bridge Solutions] people think so. Do you? The plan is to route heavy freight and other traffic on an elevated ramp that would cover the Union Street Pedestrian and Bicycle Trail for 150' at an elevation of 10-15' from the surface of the trail. That would put it about 10 feet over this girl's head. Would you use this trail if a highway was built on top of it? 

And what's worse is the fact that the trestle and trail is historic and is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Is this the way we show respect to our historic sites in Salem?

Our Salem Parks and Recreation Advisory Board is having a special meeting next Tuesday to deliberate on this. We hope they find that a highway ramp over a National Register historic site is unacceptable.

It sure should be unacceptable.

But this is how the Salem River Crossing consultants talked about the Third Bridge's impact on the Union Street Pedestrian Bridge. "Constructive use" is bureaucratic-speak for the Third Bridge having an impact on those who use the Pedestrian Bridge. I've boldfaced the most absurd part.
Download SRC_Final Sec 4f_ParksRec_Memo

1.2.3.4 Determination of Constructive Use

No constructive use of the Union Street Railroad Pedestrian and Bicycle Trail is anticipated as a result of project actions. User access to the Union Street Railroad Pedestrian and Bicycle Trail will remain as it is currently. The function of the existing trail is as an active recreational facility located in an urbanized area in close proximity to highly-used transportation infrastructure (Marion Street Bridge); as such the increased noise and changed aesthetics associated with the introduction of an elevated structure over one part of the trail would not amount to proximity impacts so severe that the protected recreational activities, features, and attributes that qualify the Union Street Railroad Pedestrian and Bicycle Trail for protection under Section 4(f) would be substantially impaired.

This is complete crap.

Here's a photo I took during last month's WillaMutt Strut event sponsored by the Willamette Humane Society.  ZuZu, our dog, and I are facing toward Wallace Marine Park -- where the elevated bridge roadways would pass right through the park and over the Union Street Pedestrian Bridge we were on.

The Marion Street Bridge is barely visible on the far left of the photo. It is absolutely not true that the aesthetic impact of the Marion Street bridge is the same as having an elevated roadway pass 10-15 feet right over the Pedestrian Bridge. 

I barely notice the Marion Street Bridge when I use the Union Street Pedestrian Bridge. I would damn sure notice a quasi-freeway 10 feet over my head when I got to the west end of the pedestrian bridge. 

Another No 3rd Bridge post from July 10 provides another perspective on the impact the Third Bridge would have on Wallace Marine Park and the Union Street Pedestrian Bridge.

TONIGHT AT CITY COUNCIL — NEED MORE TIME TO SET ODOT STRAIGHT
Thanks to Councilor Cara Kaser for bringing a motion to the City Council tonight to extend the public comment period on 3rd Bridge impacts to Wallace Marine Park and other parklands. ODOT and the City originally set a two week comment period. Not enough. Not when the subject is whether the 3rd Bridge project would harm recreational assets in parks like the nearly new Glen Creek Trail, a peaceful treelined byway that is enjoyed daily by hundreds of walkers, bicyclists and joggers.

The preliminary determination is that the impact is "de minimis," to use ODOT-speak. It means trivial or insignificant. What? Look at the map below [here, above] that shows how the 3rd Bridge "connector" would route heavy freight traffic right next to the Glen Creek Trail (represented by the black line) and over the top of the trail connecting to the Union Street Bridge. "De minimus"? You gotta be kidding.

Salem needs some civic cheerleaders

I wish Salem had more cheerleaders.

I'm not talking about the rah-rah pom-pom wielding variety (though I love them too; my granddaughter is one), but people who manifest these qualities:

(1) They have an over-arching creative progressive vision for the marvelous town Salem can become.
(2) They have the charisma and drive to draw others into supporting this vision.
(3) They have the power, talent, influence, and resources to convert visionary dreams into reality.

I got to thinking about this after someone thanked me for my blog posts about Sustainable Fairview, the project to redevelop the Fairview Training Center in south Salem that had grand ambitions, yet has mostly failed to achieve them.

Curious to re-read some of those posts, here's part of what I found I'd said in "Sadly, the vision of Salem's Sustainable Fairview has been much diluted."

I remember the three-plus years (2003-2006) when my wife and I owned shares in Sustainable Fairview Associates, LLC. We went to many meetings where the master plan for the 275 acres was being discussed. There was an overall integrated vision for the property, the goal being to create a world-class sustainable development that would draw people from far and wide.

...bit by bit, the 275 acre Fairview property has been balkanized. Pringle Creek Community bought part. Simpson Hills, LLC bought part. Olsen Design & Development bought part. Now the City of Salem likely will buy a part. And Sustainable Fairview Associates still owns a part.

Thus one sustainable vision has turned into five visions of... this and that. Pringle Creek Community has upheld the original vision, so far as I know. The other buyers, not so much (and in the case of Simpson Hills, that might be an overstatement). 

...Yesterday I heard from a fellow SFA investor who sympathized with my frustrations, but said that he still hoped to live at Fairview one day and form a community with like-minded people. Well, that’s great. I hope that his dream comes true. 

However, special settings that attract special people require a special mindset for their creation. The soul of Walt Disney still is felt in Disneyland. The soul of John Bogle still is felt in Vanguard. The soul of Conrad Hilton still is felt in Hilton hotels. By contrast, conventional people create conventional settings that attract other conventional people. When I say “conventional” I don’t mean untalented or unsuccessful. I mean something that is hard to put into words, but is apparent to anyone who visits a special place. 

...[here's] one of the most frustrating things about living in Salem: too often, people are overly cautious and uncreative, failing to dream big and follow through on that unique vision.

Understand: Salem has creative people. Salem has progressively-minded people with great vision. Salem has wealthy people who can make things happen. Salem has charismatic people who are good leaders.

The problem is, these are different people. I can't think of anyone who combines the qualities of "creative," "progressive," "wealthy," and "charismatic." 

Now, before I get accused of being overly elitist, let me explain why I included "wealthy" in my list of attributes for a civic cheerleader. I'm not talking billionaire. I'm speaking about someone who has the personal financial resources to devote to visionary causes, both through donations of his/her own time and, yes, direct monetary contributions. 

Think Larry Tokarski of Mountain West Investment. But a creative, progressive, charismatic version who, when he/she speaks, others pay attention, because this is a guy/gal who can make great things happen. 

Part of Salem's problem is that our town isn't a corporate headquarters. We don't have software or high-tech companies headed by liberal entrepreneurs who can fill the role of civic cheerleader, whereas other cities about our size do have these sorts of people in their citizenry.

Another problem is how our city government is organized. Almost by design, the City of Salem lacks the inherent capacity to be a local government cheerleader. 

City councilors aren't paid. Neither is the Mayor. They don't have staff. The City Council has the power to set priorities, but not the power to implement them. This power resides with the City Manager and other top department heads. Yet nobody at the City of Salem is anywhere close to being the Civic Cheerleader our town needs.

Yes, discrete things get done. One after the other. Pretty much by happenstance. A bike path here. Road improvements there. Ride sharing gets approved. The Third Bridge boondoggle staggers on. Budgets are passed. And so on. 

Yet all this doesn't begin to add up to a cohesive, exciting, creative vision for Salem's future that makes citizens go "Wow! I'm SO on board with what's happening!"

Mayor Bennett doesn't inspire. City Manager Powers is very laid-back in his public appearances. The eight city councilors have moments of enthusiasm, but these are irregular and poorly known due to the Statesman Journal's lack of attention to covering City Hall matters (Salem Weekly does better but only is published every two weeks, despite its name).

So there's a void in Salem when it comes to what this town needs. To repeat, cheerleaders who have:

(1) An over-arching creative progressive vision for the marvelous town Salem can become.
(2) The charisma and drive to draw others into supporting this vision.
(3) The power, talent, influence, and resources to convert visionary dreams into reality.

Right now those with the creative progressive vision don't have the power. Those with the power don't have a creative progressive vision.

The prevailing ethos in Salem seems to be "we'll just muddle along and hope for the best, but without really trying for anything more than average."

There are many reasons for this, but I believe a lack of cheerleaders -- of the variety I've described -- holds our town back from becoming truly noteworthy. This should be our goal: mindblowing uniqueness, not ho-hum I've seen that before. 

I'll end with another excerpt from my post about Sustainable Fairview, since what I said applies to Salem as a whole.

Sustainable Fairview Associates had an opportunity to create a world-class sustainable community here in Salem that would have been a truly special place. It would have drawn people from all over the country, and even the world, who wanted to live and work at Fairview.

Some places people seek out. Other places—Aspen, Sedona, Carmel, Ashland—draw people like a magnet. And they are interesting people, unconventional people, special people. Whenever we go to visit friends in Ashland I realize that there are more artistic and creative souls in this southern Oregon home of the Shakespeare festival than there are in Salem, which has five times more people.

...Thinking big, thinking “outside the box,” thinking creatively—the lack of such thinking is what frustrates Laurel and me as investors in Sustainable Fairview Associates.

If we had wanted to invest in something conventional we would have left our money in index mutual funds. Instead, we were seriously seeking to help create a special setting that both we and the world could enjoy. Maybe it still will come to be. I doubt it, unless some special people with a special vision take over the management of SFA, and create a development that matches their sensibilities. 

"Jesus loves strippers" sign gets Salem hot and bothered

Over on the Salem Community Vision Facebook page, a post about this illegal sign has gotten a lot of attention.  

The sign is in the public right of way, which violates the City of Salem sign ordinance. So I'm wondering if Jesus loves illegal signs. Here's what the Salem Community Vision post said.

THIS IS WHAT YOU GET WHEN YOU DON'T ENFORCE THE CITY SIGN CODE
There are hundreds of illegal temporary signs in the public right of way all over Salem, but this one on Mission Street really takes the cake!

The signs proliferate because for years now the City has stopped enforcing our sign code which prohibits temporary signs in the ROW [right of way]. When small businesses see signs in the ROW all over town, they think its okay. It's not. It's a blight and an embarrassment. Out of towners must think we're a bunch of yahoos who don't give a damn about the appearance of Oregon's capital city.

Do you suppose we could do something about this before we get thousands of visitors for the eclipse in August? How about a volunteer enforcement brigade? We'd send a message: Don't Mess With Salem.

I totally agreed with these sentiments.

My next thoughts were these: (1) asking drivers to "honk if you agree" about anything seems stupid, especially when no one is around to hear the honking (does Jesus also love honking?), and (2) what the heck is PoleGems?

It turns out that this group aims "to support, empower, and equip people working in all facets of adult entertainment, and victims of sex trafficking, to live healthy, flourishing lives."

Well, that sounds good -- aside from the question of why PoleGems seemingly feels the need to butt into the lives of everybody who works in the adult entertainment industry, regardless of whether they feel the need for support, empowerment, and equipment to live healthy, flourishing lives.

A bit of browsing around the PoleGems web site and Facebook page led to a rather obvious conclusion: PoleGems is out to proselytize in the name of their Jesus who supposedly loves strippers.

[Note: I don't believe in God or in any religion. So trying to convert people to Christianity or any other supernatural fantasy strikes me as a waste of time. But I also believe in freedom of expression, so long as it isn't coercive. Along that line, I suspect that many, if not most, workers in the adult entertainment industry view PoleGems as I view Jehovah's Witnesses: people who deserve to hear "No, thanks, not interested."]

Here's a few excerpts from the PoleGems web site:

We have a great team of volunteers at POLE Gems. We are all committed to furthering the mission of Christ by assisting women and men who are involved in the sex industry. We believe that God has called us to this particular field and love to see Him working in the lives of those we serve.

...We have many opportunities to get connected with POLE Gems. First, pray! Our ministry would not be as successful as it is without the covering of prayer from our many supporters! Our volunteers gather once a month to go into the clubs with gifts and love for the staff and dancers.

And the PoleGems Facebook page talks about their connection with Strip Church in Las Vegas.

Strip Church serves, teaches and equips women who share a heart and calling to reach out into clubs. We provide 2-3 Training Conferences each year, developing 20-30 people each time. These leaders are trained to do strip club ministry in their cities across the U.S. Our Strip Church Network is supported through monthly training conference calls, resources, networked websites, blogs, prayer, and branded materials to use inside the clubs.

OK. Like I said, this is a free country.

Christians are free to proselytize in overt and covert ways. Bringing gift bags to women who work in strip clubs and befriending them in hopes they will come to Jesus (and leave the adult entertainment industry) is a totally legal thing to do. 

Personally, though, I feel that Christian efforts to bring people back to the "straight and narrow" would be better served by visiting the head offices of large money-sucking corporations, especially those in the fossil fuel industries that are wrecking our planet. 

I realize that some of the workers in strip clubs are taken advantage of and need help. But so do workers in many other industries, which leads me to suspect that the zeal of PoleGems is founded more in a moralistic judgement that strip clubs are evil, than in a desire to help the most afflicted American workers.

Regardless... let's get back to the illegal sign.

It really is illegal, as Salem Community Vision pointed out to the executive director of PoleGems, Cynthia Shaver -- who commented on the Facebook post, saying she was just trying to draw attention to a July 4 fundraiser and didn't know the sign violated a City ordinance.

Regardless of the content and your good intentions, this sign is illegal. It's in the public right of way. You could be fined $2,000 a day if the City enforced their code. You need to move it back from the street (behind the sidewalk) and then it will be legal. Do it now please. Repect the law.

Disturbingly, even after Shaver was told about the prohibition on temporary signs in the public right of way (which includes the area between a sidewalk and a street), she persisted in her belief that it was OK for the large illegal PoleGems sign to remain standing.

It seems strange to me that a "good Christian" would knowingly flaunt the law, especially when her group is dedicated to helping people who they consider might be at risk of getting involved in illegal activities.

My proud atheism may be speaking here, but I often find that religious people are annoyingly sure that whatever they're doing in the "name of God" is beyond reproach. In this case, PoleGems needs to realize that they are violating the City of Salem temporary sign ordinance.

The fact that many other businesses and organizations also are in violation of the ordinance is no excuse. If PoleGems wants people in Salem to believe that they are out to do the right thing for people in this town, they should start acting like good citizens.

Tear down this sign!, Ms. Shaver. (To kind of quote Ronald Reagan.)