Salem Political Snark

Salem City Council reverses itself and approves Meyer Farm subdivision

Some Salem progressives are deeply irritated at fellow progressives on the City Council after Monday night's 4-3 approval of a revised Meyer Farm subdivision application , which followed a 5-2 denial of the application on February 28.

The Friends of The Meyer Farm Facebook page has an image that sums up how opponents of the subdivision are feeling today.

They're justified in feeling this way. 

One reason is how City of Salem staff turned a subdivision denial into an approval by working with the applicant on a revised application, even though opponents figured that what staff should have been doing is preparing a Final Order of the denial.

This gave the developer, Portland based Kehoe Northwest Properties, time to turn a loss into a win. Opponents of the subdivision likely are wondering what occurred outside of public view to result in a City Council vote against the development becoming a vote for the development.

However, when we look at how the votes changed between February 28 and March 28, there's less room for anger at city councilors altering their position on the subdivision -- while still providing considerable justification for outrage.

Particularly at several progressive members of the City Council.

On February 28 there were eight members of the council, conservative Jim Lewis having resigned his seat. Those voting to approve the subdivision were Chuck Bennett and Jose Gonzalez. Those voting to deny the subdivision were Tom Andersen, Trevor Phillips, Jackie Leung, Chris Hoy, and Vanessa Nordyke. Virginia Stapleton was absent.

But prior to the denial, at the February 28 meeting there was a motion to approve the subdivision with some conditions. Hoy, Bennett, and Nordyke were in favor of the motion. Andersen, Leung, Phillips, and Gonzalez opposed the motion.

Yesterday, March 28, all nine City Council positions were filled, since Micki Varney, a progressive, had been selected to fill Jim Lewis' seat. This time Jackie Leung was absent, a crucial absence, because there were only four votes to approve the subdivision application: Bennett, Gonzalez, Stapleton, Hoy. Three councilors voted to deny the application: Nordyke, Andersen, Phillips. 

Varney abstained. A Salem Reporter story says:

Councilor Micki Varney, who was appointed to the council last week to serve the remainder of Jim Lewis’ term, abstained because she hadn’t had a chance to review testimony, City Attorney Dan Atchison said at the meeting. Councilor Jackie Leung was not in attendance.

Wow. Micki Varney didn't start off her council appointment at all positively.

It's mind-boggling that Varney didn't take the time to review testimony on probably the most important land use decision that will come before the City Council this year. It also doesn't look good that the City Attorney apparently was the one to explain why Varney abstained, not Varney herself. 

So if opponents of the Meyer Farm subdivision are looking for someone to blame for the subdivision's approval, Micki Varney would be Culprit #1. If she had voted against the revised application, the motion to approve it would have failed on a 4-4 tie. 

Culprit #2 has to be Jackie Leung, another progressive, who voted against the subdivision on February 28. Unless Leung has a really good explanation for why she missed Monday's meeting, the ire of subdivision opponents should be focused on Leung, along with Varney. 

(I like both Leung and Varney. I've supported their City Council campaigns. But I've got to call them out on this issue, because to me failing to vote on an important issue is worse than voting in a way I disagree with. Democracy belongs only to those who show up.)

NOTE: Initially I had it as Leung and Nordyke rather than Leung and Varney. I wrote this post late at night and my proof-reading obviously was lacking, being excessively focused on turning on our TV and starting to watch the 4th season of "Yellowstone." Great series by the way.

Virginia Stapleton was absent on February 28, so her position on the Meyer Farm subdivision wasn't known, making it not much of a surprise when she voted to approve it yesterday. Chris Hoy was in favor of a modified subdivision plan on February 28, so it wasn't a huge shock when he voted in favor of a modified plan on March 28. The Salem Reporter story says:

Hoy previously made a motion during a March 1 meeting [actually, it was February 28] to modify the planning administrator’s decision, telling the applicant to preserve significant trees on 10 lots by dedicating them as open space or incorporating them into the homestead lot. He also called for relocating a pedestrian path on Hilfiker Lane to ensure it didn’t impact trees. That motion failed.

At Monday’s meeting, he said he believed the new application got “very close” to his previous motion.

“I think it's the best outcome we can hope for given the difficult situation,” Hoy said.

Likely this isn't the final word on the Meyer Farm subdivision. Members of the Meyer family who don't want to see the farm turned into a housing development are engaged in a legal challenge regarding ownership with the family members who do favor development. 

That's one way the subdivision could be stopped. An appeal to LUBA, Land Use Board of Appeals, is another way. There appears to be some valid grounds for appeal.

No reasonable person should be a Republican

Being a Republican used to be a respectable political position.

My mother was an avid Republican. Until I went to college, I shared her conservatism. I grew up reading National Review. William F. Buckley was only one of numerous noted Republican intellectuals. Back then, Republicans believed in conserving the environment, which fit with their conservative principles.

Now, in the Age of Trump, Republicans should rename themselves as the Know-Nothing Party. (Yeah, I know, that name was taken in the 1850's, but it's time to resurrect it.)

There's so many examples of Republican craziness, I'm going to limit myself to two recent instances that have caught my eye.

The Senate confirmation hearings for Ketanji Brown Jackson's Supreme Court nomination put Republican weaknesses on full display. I watched enough of the questioning by Republican Senators to be able to say with complete confidence that each and every one of them is either clueless or a liar.

Or, both.

Jackson completely demolished their pitiful attempts to make her sentencing of people convicted of child pornography offenses into a political weapon.

Every knowledgeable neutral legal observer, including the American Bar Association, has found that Jackson is both eminently qualified and has sentenced child pornography criminals in accord with accepted standards.

But that didn't stop Ted Cruz, John Hawley, Lindsey Graham, and other Republican senators from shamelessly lying about Jackson's record as a judge, which clearly is exemplary.

Their hypocrisy is breathtaking, since they ignored credible accusations of sexual misconduct against Bret Kavanaugh during his Supreme Court nomination hearings, while trying to make Ketanji Brown Jackson look like a pedophile-lover, an obvious attempt to curry favor with the insane fantasy of QAnon followers that leading Democrats are engaged in sex trafficking of young children.

Clarence and Ginni Thomas

Then there's the breaking news that Ginni Thomas, the wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas,  sent text messages to Trump's Chief of Staff, Mark Meadows, urging him to overturn Biden's free and fair election victory so Trump could remain office.

In the weeks between the 2020 presidential election and the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, Virginia Thomas, the wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, sent a barrage of text messages imploring President Donald J. Trump’s chief of staff to take steps to overturn the vote, according to a person with knowledge of the texts.

...The text messages, most of which were written by Ms. Thomas, represent the first evidence that she was directly advising the White House as it sought to overturn the election. In fact, in her efforts to keep Mr. Trump in power, Ms. Thomas effectively toggled between like-minded members of the executive and legislative branches, even as her husband, who sits atop the judiciary branch that is supposed to serve as a check on the other branches of government, heard election-related cases.

Pretty big deal. The Republican wife of a Republican Supreme Court Justice is engaging in an effort to illegally hand the presidential election to Republican Donald Trump. Imagine if the spouse of a Democratic Supreme Court Justice had attempted this sort of crap.

There would be cries from conservatives that the Justice should resign, or at least recuse themselves from any Supreme Court cases involving election law. But almost certainly there will be silence from the cowardly Republicans in Congress, because they are afraid of offending their Putin-adoring authoritarian-wanna-be, Trump.

For sure there are many decent, reasonable Republicans. However, so long as they choose to remain in their party, they're supporting underhanded Republican efforts to subvert democracy and undo many of the rights supported by a majority of Americans, like same-sex marriage and abortion.

Stacey Vieyra-Braendle is the progressive Ward 6 candidate

I guessed right.

Twelve days ago I wrote a blog post, "Mayor and City Council candidates: a first look," where without knowing much about the two Ward 6 candidates for city council, I said:

Ward 6. Julie Hoy and Stacey Vieyra-Braendle are the candidates seeking to fill Chris Hoy's seat. I could be completely wrong about this, but it seems strange that an unrelated Hoy just happens to hope to replace Chris Hoy. 

This is the sort of thing Republicans would do. So I'll indulge my conspiracy theory mind and theorize that Julie Hoy leans conservative. I know nothing about Vieyra-Braendle. If she turns out to be conservative, I wouldn't be all that surprised, but for now I'm guessing she's the more liberal candidate.

Tonight I got an email from Progressive Salem, who is supporting Vieyra-Braendle.

The email included a link to her campaign web site. Being a progressive myself, I liked what I saw there. Ward 6 voters shouldn't hesitate to cast their ballot for Vieyra-Braendle in the May election.

This statement on her home page is very appealing.

Salem should be more than just the place we live. It should be a community in which everyone thrives. As a Mixed Latina and healthcare professional with invisible disabilities, I know that the path to health and well-being is complex. It requires leaders who will engage our neighbors, listen to them, and then act. I’ve got the skills for this job.

Here's some of her positions, as stated on her web site:

Houselessness and Affordable Housing

Sheltering for all. As we expand sheltering, I will advocate for services and supports that meet the needs of all of our houseless neighbors. This includes ensuring adequate mental health support, youth services, and shelters equipped to support people recovering from major medical events or illnesses.

Low-barrier sheltering. We need increased low-barrier sheltering options for our neighbors. A criminal record or substance use does not make someone unworthy of having their basic needs met. 

Affordable housing. I will encourage more affordable housing and housing in multi-use areas for easier access to services and public transportation.

Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility

Equity lens. It’s time Salem officially adopts an equity lens, and creates tools that actively incorporate equity into our decision-making processes. It is no longer enough to say “we’re trying” - we must be deliberate on our path to reducing disparities. We must be clear about our commitment to justice and equity. We must embrace diversity, not erase it. 

Increase access to child care. Our Ward is a childcare desert. I will support parents and caregivers in getting adequate childcare support because the impacts of this extend to all of us. If parents are not forced to choose between childcare and work, we have increased diversity of thought and experiences in our workforce, and employees show up on time and more consistently. If childcare is made available outside of work hours, civic engagement increases dramatically. 

Fair share of city resources. I will include Ward 6 investments in the Community Bond measure, such as:

-- Adequate sidewalks on Center, Hawthorne and Park Streets so our kids can walk to school safely and people can walk to work and services.

-- A branch library. Libraries serve as key community hubs where children not only learn to read, but where neighbors can get support in navigating healthcare, looking up jobs, and more.

A Healthier Salem

Creating jobs through solar. I will create local jobs and support small and minority-owned businesses by locating the Community Solar Project in the Salem Climate Action Plan in underserved northeast Salem. This in turn will reduce health disparities we experience, by cleaning up our air and environment. 

Mobile Crisis Response Unit. I will help develop Salem’s Mobile Crisis Response Unit, staffed with mental health professionals. In the midst of a mental health crisis, the last thing our neighbors need is a police response. It also saves us all money by decreasing the number of persons jailed as a result of mental health issues. 

Increase access to public transportation. I will collaborate with Cherriots and other partners to increase bus services to our Ward and others, to put a public transit hub in Ward 6, and to provide free bus passes to students. The benefits of doing this are many: it improves our air quality by decreasing the use of personal vehicles, makes it easier for neighbors to access resources and services, and more.

Fear of WW III can't stop us from battling Putin with all our might

Just before I started to write this blog post, I got a reminder that it's time to use CleanMyMac, a utility program I've been using without thinking where the creators come from.

Now I know. This message popped up when I opened CleanMyMac.

We stop selling our products to users from the Russian Federation and Belarus with this release. Ukraine is our home, and we want to protect it in every way we can.

 

Despite the war, CleanMyMac is stable, and our team is safe. We try to stay calm, focused, and optimistic for a peaceful future of independent Ukraine. And we are deeply grateful for all the incredible messages of support you've sent our way.

 

Слава Україні 🇺🇦

I was moved.

Like so many other Americans, and people all around the world, I'm hugely supportive of Ukraine and deeply irritated at the war crimes being committed by Putin's forces following Russia's invasion of Ukraine without provocation. 

Today I heard a report that a Russian tank killed 56 people at an elderly care home, taking 15 people hostage.

Ukraine's claims have not been independently verified but were tweeted out by Ukraine's State Service of Special Communications.

In a statement, it said: "56 people were killed in Kreminna, Luhansk Oblast - the occupiers shot from a tank (a) home for the elderly.

"Russians fired at it. Cynically and deliberately. They adjusted the tank, put it in front of the house, and started firing."

The statement went on: "Those who lived to their old age in the house - 56 people - died on the spot. The survivors, 15 people, were abducted by the occupiers and taken to the occupied territory in Svatove to the regional geriatric boarding school."

Many thousands of other civilians, including women and children, have been killed by Russia's indiscriminate shelling of residential areas in Ukrainian cities. 

By and large, I'm pleased with how the Biden administration has handled the Ukraine crisis. However, I still feel that President Biden needs to act more forcefully against Putin.

What irks me the most is talk that the United States can't support sending Polish MiG airplanes to Ukraine because this could "provoke" Putin. 

Wow.

Putin is bombing apartment complexes. He's shelling places where civilians are sheltering against Russian artillery fire and missiles. He's abducting Ukrainians who were forced to enter Russia after fleeing Ukraine and sending them to Siberia (literally). He's using hypersonic missiles for the first time in warfare.

Putin clearly isn't worried about provoking the United States and our allies, yet we're supposed to worry about provoking him?

Today the Secretary General of NATO refused to say on Meet the Press whether NATO would consider Russia's use of chemical weapons in Ukraine a red line that would merit a NATO response. 

Biden administration officials keep saying that the United States can't do everything possible to aid Ukraine because Russia is a nuclear power. That's ridiculous.

The United States also is a nuclear power. Putin should be as afraid of us using nuclear weapons as we're afraid of Russia using nuclear weapons. 

Mutually Assured Destruction is still the only viable strategy for preventing World War III. That was the case in the Cold War. It's still the case in this Ukraine hot war. I'm not saying that the United States should fight directly against Russian forces.

A no-fly zone enforced by our country doesn't make sense, since this could entail shooting down Russian airplanes.

However, there's no reason we can't aid Ukraine by giving them every possible type of conventional weapon, including MiG fighters that would be supplied by our Eastern European allies in exchange for the United States replacing those planes with newer fighter jets.

And Ukraine should get our most advanced ground-to-air missile systems, even if this requires training by American advisors. Putin is trying to bring in mercenaries from Syria, Libya, and perhaps other nations to aid in Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Belarus troops also are poised to fight in Ukraine on behalf of Russia.

So why should the United States be reluctant to have MiGs flown into Ukraine from an American airbase in Germany, or have a small number of American military advisors engaged in noncombat roles in Ukraine?

Putin only responds to force arrayed against him. As an ex-KGB officer, he is skilled at sensing weakness in an adversary.

Right now, I'm worried that the United States is coming across as weak to Putin. That will only lead to more bloodshed, since an emboldened Putin is much more dangerous than a Putin who fears even stronger military aid being sent to Ukraine.

Mark Wigg has ideas to help the homeless

Mark Wigg is a Salem community activist who is running for the Marion County Board of Commissioners seat currently held by Colm Willis.

Mark Wigg

Since Wigg is unopposed in the Democratic primary, and Willis is unopposed in the Republican primary, they'll face off in the November 2022 general election.

I wholeheartedly support Wigg. Currently all three of the Marion County Commissioners are conservative Republicans. Wigg would bring fresh ideas and some political balance to the board.

Here's an essay Wigg sent me about the homeless crisis. He's absolutely correct that what's being tried now isn't working very well. 

From Problem to Asset

Marion County Commissioners and Salem’s Mayor are treating the homeless crisis as a problem to be addressed by pushing the homeless from camp to camp.

They think the problem is solved if these people are out of sight. They blame the homeless for their situation and want to punish them for being poor and homeless.

The commissioners and mayor then complain that businesses can’t find enough employees to stay open or expand. I’ll bet you already can see the solution to both problems. Let us hope the commissioners and mayor will see it too.

From studies and experience, I learned that about 30 percent of the homeless are too damaged physically or mentally to hold a job. The longer a person is homeless the more likely they will get to this point.

Forcing these people to live in dangerous, unsanitary camps is cruel and does nothing to reduce the problems society faces.

A friend of mine is a counselor and was working with a young person on their substance abuse problems. She would meet her client at the park near his homeless camp. After the police rousted the campers, she lost contact with her client. I would guess that her client suffered a major setback in trying to be clean and sober after that.

About 50 percent of the homeless want to work and are able to work. Many homeless people have jobs but it is a challenge to keep a job if you are homeless. For example, I went to Woodburn to find Matthew with my friend, a Private Investigator.

Matthew told her where he was camped and we found the camp, but Matthew wasn’t there. He was at work. She called and he said come the next day. When we called him the next day, he said he would not be at his camp because all his stuff was stolen while he was at work.

We don’t have the money to provide a house for every homeless person. We do have the money to provide safe, sanitary campgrounds for these people.

With 80 percent of the homeless in safe, sanitary campgrounds, the police and sheriff could focus more time on the 20 percent that currently are committing crimes. Officers have told me that 30 percent of a patrol officer’s time is spent dealing with homeless issues and most of that time is rousting campers or dealing with issues associated with unmanaged camps.

When we become the communities that help people find stable living situations so they can become employees, and when we show other communities that we care for those most in need, we become the light in these dark times, and the world needs our light.

Hollie Oakes-Miller suspends her campaign for Mayor of Salem

This afternoon I got an email from Hollie Oakes-Miller.

Family, Friends, and Comrades,

I am sad to announce that we are suspending the campaign for Mayor of Salem and I will be taking some time to rest, reflect, and refocus.

I am deeply grateful for all of your support through this campaign!! Thank you!  

~Hollie  

I'm not sure if "suspending" means Oakes-Miller is withdrawing from the Mayor race, or if she's just taking a break from campaigning.

UPDATE: Just got this message from someone who's usually knowledgeable about local political happenings. 

"Just FYI, I have it on good authority that Hollie came up three signatures short of turning in the required number of valid signatures and failed to make the ballot for that reason. She will not be on the ballot."

Regardless, she had a Facebook page, a web site, and a pleasingly oak'y campaign image.

Today some friends and I were discussing how the race for Mayor might turn out with three candidates: Chane Griggs, Chris Hoy, and Hollie Oakes-Miller.

I theorized that Oakes-Miller, a founding member of Salem Democratic Socialists of America, likely would get around 10-15% of the vote, though this would have been hard to predict, since "democratic socialist" is really appealing to younger voters and quite a few others, while a danger sign to older voters and those wary of far-left politics.

A Mayor candidate would need to get 50% of the vote in the May primary, plus at least one more vote, to avoid a runoff in the November election. Assuming 10-15% for Oakes-Miller, that would have meant that if Griggs or Hoy got 50%, the other would get 35-40% of the vote.

Possible, but sort of unlikely given that Griggs and Hoy are both strong candidates. Griggs, because she's the Salem Establishment/Chamber of Commerce candidate; Hoy, because he's served on the City Council and has a law enforcement background. 

However, if Oakes-Miller has dropped out of the Mayor race, this makes it virtually certain that either Griggs or Hoy will get over 50% of the May primary vote -- assuming Oakes-Miller doesn't remain on the ballot.

If she merely fails to campaign, yet remains a candidate, I suspect she'd still get 10-15% of the vote, requiring a runoff between Griggs and Hoy.

By the way, to burnish my Democratic Socialist credentials, I supported Hollie Oakes-Miller in her 2020 Ward 5 City Council race against Jose Gonzales, a conservative candidate. Oakes-Miller lost narrowly, despite being outspent by a lot.

I'm confident that if Progressive Salem and the progressives on the City Council had given Oakes-Miller some backing, she would have beaten Gonzales. Instead, they either sat this race out, or supported Gonzales -- for reasons that still escape me.

Mayor and City Council candidates: a first look

This is going to be an unusual year for local politics.

For the first time since I've been following political goings-on in our city, there's no incumbents running for Mayor or half of the City Council seats -- the even-numbered ones, Wards 2, 4, 6, 8.

What's obvious is that control of the City Council is at stake.

Currently progressives have a 6-3 majority. Well, actually 6-2, since Jim Lewis, the conservative Ward 8 councilor, has resigned and a temporary replacement hasn't been appointed yet. 

The five seats being voted on in the May primary (which determines who wins outright if someone gets over 50% of the vote) have been held by two conservatives -- Mayor Bennett and Jim Lewis -- while three progressives decided not to seek re-election: Tom Andersen, Chris Hoy, and Jackie Leung. 

Andersen and Leung are competing against each other for the Democratic nomination to a state legislature seat, House District 19. 

Mayor. Chris Hoy is running for Mayor against two other candidates.

Chane Griggs appears to be the Chamber of Commerce's choice, being more conservative than Hoy and having by far the most funds raised at this point, over $60,000. Hollie Oakes-Miller is more liberal than Hoy.

So this race could go to a November run-off, likely between Griggs and Hoy. If money talks, Griggs would be the winner. But Hoy is an affable guy with city council experience in a left-leaning town, so I'm betting Hoy will end up being Salem's next Mayor.

Ward 2. Linda Nishioka is the only candidate who filed to run for Tom Andersen's city council seat. This suggests that she's a progressive like Andersen, since I deeply doubt Andersen would want his seat filled by a conservative. This race is easy to predict: Nishioka wins!

Ward 4. Deanna Gwyn is a broker with Blum Real Estate and a secretary with the Mid-Valley Association of Realtors. I'm guessing she's the conservative candidate attempting to fill progressive Jackie Leung's seat. 

Dynee Medlock is endorsed by Casey Kopcho, who dropped out of this race after filing for it. Kopcho strikes me as a moderate, if not a progressive, so likely Medlock shares his political perspective.

Ward 6. Julie Hoy and Stacey Vieyra-Braendle are the candidates seeking to fill Chris Hoy's seat. I could be completely wrong about this, but it seems strange that an unrelated Hoy just happens to hope to replace Chris Hoy. 

This is the sort of thing Republicans would do. So I'll indulge my conspiracy theory mind and theorize that Julie Hoy leans conservative. I know nothing about Vieyra-Braendle. If she turns out to be conservative, I wouldn't be all that surprised, but for now I'm guessing she's the more liberal candidate.

Ward 8. In the race to fill Jim Lewis's old seat, the progressive candidate clearly is Micki Varney, who lost to Lewis four years ago. Her opponent is Chris Cummings, who likely is the more conservative candidate. 

Varney has to be favored, given her previous race against Lewis and a longer track record of community service in West Salem. 

The Statesman Journal and Salem Reporter each had stories about the Mayor and City Council candidates, which I drew on for this blog post.

Bring on higher gas prices, since it punishes Putin

Nobody likes to pay more for gasoline.

But we all should be pleased to do this when it keeps American money out of the hands of the Russian thug, Vladimir Putin, who is bombing residential areas in Ukraine mercilessly.

Today President Biden announced that the United States won't be importing Russian oil, which accounts for 3% of our oil supply. 

Since Russia's invasion of Ukraine about two weeks ago, gas prices have risen considerably. I recall that the Shell station in south Salem where I usually fill up was charging about $3.95 a gallon pre-invasion. When I drove by today the price for regular was $4.45.

Rising prices makes many people feel this way when they pass by a gas station.

That's understandable.

Many people are living on a limited strict budget. Paying more for gas when you need your car to get to work hurts. Hopefully the Biden administration can find ways to help low-income people pay for gas until the price comes down.

Still, one thing is clear: Biden did the right thing.

Russia's invasion of Ukraine actually isn't a fight between those two nations. It is a fight between authoritarian tyrants who want to use military might to keep themselves in power and extend their control, and democracies who stand for the rule of international law and stable borders.

As President Zelensky of Ukraine has been saying, his country is battling for all of Europe, and indeed the world, against Putin's desire to restore the Soviet Union through military force. If he succeeds in taking over Ukraine, Putin and other authoritarian rulers will be emboldened to invade other sovereign nations.

Problem is, says Zelensky, only Ukrainians are fighting and dying in its war with Russia. So we Americans should be eager to do something much easier than what the brave Ukrainian people are enduring: pay more for gasoline. 

We've been spoiled by low gas prices. Europeans pay much more than we do. I recall seeing today that the equivalent price of a gallon of gas in Europe is $7.21. They'd view even $5/gallon as a bargain.

Of course, for a variety of reasons Europeans drive smaller cars that get better gas mileage. We've enjoyed such low gas prices for so long, purchases of large SUVs and pickup trucks have been strong. That's made us more dependent on fossil fuels, even as more people buy electric vehicles.

Sadly, even though Republicans have been calling for an end to importing Russian oil, thereby depriving Putin of money he needs to feed his war machine, they will shamelessly criticize Biden when gas prices rise further, as they probably will.

It needs to be remembered that American presidents have little control over gas prices.

We live in a free market economy when it comes to oil and natural gas. Prices are determined in large part by worldwide supply and demand, a point made in an excellent article in The Atlantic, "America Is the World's Largest Oil Producer. So Why is Losing Russia's Oil Such a Big Deal?"

Since 2018, the United States has been the world’s largest producer of oil and natural gas. On paper, “we are energy independent,” John Hess, the CEO of Hess, said yesterday at CERAWeek, the energy industry’s annual conference. But what a funny kind of independence it is.

As he spoke, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine pushed U.S. gas prices to more than $4.10 a gallon, setting a new all-time high. Energy independence has neither insulated the economy from geopolitics nor provided the U.S. with more industrial capacity in an emergency. It certainly hasn’t helped slow down climate change.

Energy independence was not, let it be said, an altogether terrible idea. It was, like, fine. When oil prices leap worldwide, major oil-producing countries such as Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates are able to insulate their citizens from the shock.

For geological and political reasons, they maintain some spare capacity, that is, oil-pumping capacity that can be turned on and off within six months. They consider fossil-fuel production to be a question of national security, and they regulate it as such.

The United States does not take this approach to its fossil fuels. The federal government does not claim any right to the oil or gas under private land. It has no policy tool to quickly increase or decrease drilling.

...This means that although America may be “energy independent” on paper, American consumers have won no benefits from this independence, and American officials cannot assert this independence in any meaningful way. Market dynamics, not overzealous regulations, have imprisoned the industry.

...Energy independence was not an awful goal. But true independence cannot be achieved by the market alone. The U.S. ensures that its food supply, timberlands, and water quality are not administered solely by the market. That same philosophy can apply to two of its most important natural resources: its fossil fuels and its climate.

The first goal can be achieved through more aggressive management of the industry; the second, by a phaseout of fossil fuels altogether. Only through such stewardship can the United States secure the true dividends of prosperity and freedom.

With Ukraine, I'm becoming a progressive war hawk

It's sort of a weird feeling for me, wishing the United States would get more involved in a war after being opposed to the wars in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan (I supported the initial push to get Bin Laden, but not the twenty years in Afghanistan afterward).

However, Russia's invasion of Ukraine has pushed a warmonger button in my psyche. 

It's been infuriating to watch Putin's army bomb residential areas in Ukraine that have no military significance. I feel for the million or so Ukrainians who have fled their country after the Russian aggression. My heart aches to watch the brave Ukrainian fighters gradually get worn down by far superior Russian firepower.

Yes, it's wonderful that the United States and our European allies have been supplying Ukraine with much-needed military equipment, such as Javelin anti-tank and Stinger ground to air missiles. This isn't enough, though.

Zelensky and other Ukrainian leaders have been begging for MiG fighter jets from NATO countries that Ukraine's pilots are familiar with and could fly immediately. So far they haven't gotten any, apparently because the countries that could supply them are worried that Putin will retaliate.

I understand why many believe the no-fly zone being pushed by Ukraine isn't a good idea. If the United States were to enforce a no-fly zone, we'd have to shoot down Russian planes violating the zone. That could lead to a war between two nuclear powers -- not a good thing.

However, a Reuters poll conducted the past two days found that about three-fourths of Americans support a no-fly zone over Ukraine. 

WASHINGTON, March 4 (Reuters) - A broad bipartisan majority of Americans think the United States should stop buying Russian oil and gas and work with NATO to set up "no-fly zones" to protect Ukraine from Russian air strikes, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll completed on Friday.

The poll, conducted Thursday and Friday, suggests that U.S. outrage is growing over Russia's invasion of Ukraine, which in recent days has increasingly involved Russian bombing of urban areas.

That puts pressure on U.S. President Joe Biden to take more aggressive actions against Moscow, although he has dismissed the notion of no-fly zones because of the risk of open conflict between NATO and Russian forces.

It was not clear if respondents who supported a no-fly zone were fully aware of the risk of conflict, and majorities opposed the idea of sending American troops to Ukraine or conducting air strikes to support the Ukrainian army.

Some 74% of Americans - including solid majorities of Republicans and Democrats - said the United States and its allies in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization should impose a no-fly zone in Ukraine, the poll found.

An equally bipartisan 80% of Americans said the United States should stop buying Russian oil. The White House on Friday said it was weighing cuts to U.S. imports of Russian oil, though it is proceeding cautiously, concerned about a spike in gasoline prices that would add to high inflation.

Moreover, 81% of Americans think Washington should impose additional sanctions on Russia, up from 77% in a Reuters/Ipsos poll conducted on Monday and Tuesday. Support for more sanctions was also bipartisan.

Some 77% of respondents said the United States should seize the assets of Russian oligarchs associated with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

That's encouraging. Now President Biden has to put additional pressure on Putin to stop his war on the Ukrainian people. 

There's got to be steps in between what we're doing now and full-out war with Russia. It irks me that Belarus is openly fighting on the side of Russia, but supposedly if any NATO country fought on the side of Ukraine that would be a horrible provocation. 

As if Putin responds to anything except brute force. Putin likes to scare other nations with a threat to use his nuclear arsenal, but there's no evidence that Putin has a death wish -- for himself personally or for Russia. He's not going to start a nuclear war.

Putin got away with sending his Little Green Men, thinly disguised Russian soldiers, into Crimea in 2014. That led to him taking over that part of Ukraine. It sure seems like the United States or other NATO countries would be justified in sending Special Forces into Ukraine to aid in the fight against the Russian invasion.

Or, today I heard retired Colonel Alexander Vindman speak about how the NATO countries should set up massive staging areas for weapons needed by Ukraine just over the border of that country. He thought that large amounts of offensive weapons such as tanks and drones needed to be sent to Ukraine. 

If Russia succeeds in taking over Ukraine and installing a puppet government, then the priority would shift to supporting an insurgency in that country, as we did in Afghanistan after the Russians invaded that county.

So, yeah, I'm becoming a war hawk to a much greater degree than I could have imagined before Putin's unprovoked invasion of Ukraine. Given the Reuters poll, it looks like I have a lot of company among both conservatives and progressives. 

There's no way I'm going to thank Putin for anything. But he has succeeded in bringing our country, and the world, together on supporting the Ukrainian people against his aggression.

Meyer Farm subdivision rejected by City Council, but city staff are trying to keep it alive.

Ah, the games City of Salem staff like to play, even when they seem illegal, or at least, decidedly improper. 

Last Monday night the City Council voted 5-2 to reject an application to build a 139 single-family lot subdivision on the beautiful property in south Salem known as the Meyer Farm.

I wrote about this last October in "Thirty-acre Meyer Farm property in south Salem may be developed." Neighbors, along with others concerned about the proposed development, formed a Facebook group, Friends of The Meyer Farm.

I've followed their persistent, thoughtful, energetic efforts, finding them impressive.

Fighting a subdivision is a David versus Goliath exercise. The developer has way more money, and the City of Salem tends to favor development, since more houses means more property tax revenue for the city.

So it was a pleasant surprise to read a Salem Reporter story, "Salem City Council denies proposed subdivision on historic farm citing concerns about tree removal." 

The Salem City Council denied an application by a developer to build 139 single family lots on the historic Meyer Farm in south Salem.  

In a 5-2 vote, the council voted in favor of denying the planning administrator’s approval of the project, citing concerns over the removal of significant trees on the property.  

Mayor Chuck Bennett and Councilor Jose Gonzalez were in favor of approving the administrator’s decision. Councilor Virginia Stapleton was absent and Councilor Jim Lewis has resigned. 

The planning administrator approved the tentative plan submitted by Portland-based developer Kehoe Northwest Properties on Nov. 3.  

The plan has drawn vocal opposition from the community with members concerned about the loss of Oregon white oaks, traffic and the degradation of open space.  

Not so pleasant was a video of part of the City Council meeting shared on Facebook where Dan Atchison, the city attorney, jumps in after the 5-2 vote to say, among other things, that the developer, Kehoe Northwest Properties, can submit a revised application at the next council meeting on March 14.

This sure seems to be either illegal or highly irregular.

What the hell is going on here? The City Council had just voted to reject the subdivision application. An order to that effect should be prepared by city staff and presented to the council for a vote at the next meeting.

If Kehoe Northwest Properties wants to appeal the decision, that's their right.

But Dan Atchison shouldn't be acting like he's the attorney for the developer. He's the attorney for the City of Salem. He's supposed to represent the interests of the City of Salem, which now includes supporting the City Council rejection of the subdivision application. 

The Friends of the Meyer Farm folks see what Atchison did as wrong. And some of them are highly familiar with how land use decisions are handled by the City of Salem. A member of the group says:

If you listen to the recording of the Council vote (see above) you will then hear the City Attorney say "The Applicant has the right to modify the application and propose conditions on the 14th." That statement is alarming and sounds illegal. 

It isn't true that the only controversial part of the proposed development was how significant/protected white oaks and other trees on the property were being handled. (Mostly by being cut down.) Atchison seemed to be suggesting that all Kehoe Northwest Properties has to do is make a few changes to its tree preservation plan and, bingo, a revised application can be approved at the next city council meeting.

In a comment on a Statesman Journal story about the subdivision rejection, "Controversial plan to build homes on South Salem Meyer Farm property halted," Peter Meyer, a member of the Meyer family, said:

As would be expected, Mr. Kehoe would say he thought the deal was done. But it's not. Aside from the many serious environmental (cutting down protected trees) and transportation (terrible traffic) issues with his proposal, he doesn't even have title to the property, which is something the City Council should take seriously.

He clearly knows -- there's a paragraph about it in his Preliminary Sales Agreement -- that ownership of the farm has been in litigation since August of 2019 and continues to this day. A majority of the Henry Meyer Trust (which owns the property) beneficiaries do not want to sell the farm and a majority of Henry Meyer's descendants do not want to sell it. The Council made the right decision by refusing to commit the City's good will and resources to this bogus proposal. --peter meyer

To summarize: the city planning department wanted the application to be approved. But the City Council disagreed, voting 5-2 to deny the application. Now City of Salem staff are required to assist in carrying out the City Council order that rejects the subdivision application. The council has no staff of its own. The job of city staff is to carry out City of Salem policies and priorities. Now that includes working to carry out the rejection of the development application, not trying to undermine that decision.

UPDATE: Roger Kaye of Friends of Marion County, a land use advocacy organization, asked an attorney with 1000 Friends of Oregon about whether the Meyer Farm application could be amended by the developer. This was the response Kaye got:

Without having attended the Council meeting or read its decision, it looks like ORS 197.522(3) would not apply if the denial constitutes the city's final decision on the application. Did the council issue a written final decision or specifically state during the vote that the vote was for a final decision?

 

If, so it seems that returning with an amended application would not be consistent with ORS 197.522(3). However, on the flip side, if the council voted to deny the current version of the application but to allow the applicant to return with an amended application prior to the final decision, returning with an amended application would be ok. 

 

ORS 197.522 is pretty commonly used to allow modifications to applications. While it's possible that an applicant could have a closed door meeting with staff to amend the application, there's nothing unlawful about that as long as the amended application goes through the public land use process for the final decision. 

 

Hope this helps!