October 23, 2003
MAA board doesn’t listen
I was an attendee at this week’s Mount Ashland Association’s board meeting.
The public in attendance spoke against the proposed ski expansion. The speakers were very eloquent, intelligent and spoke from their hearts. Unfortunately, the board responded by being rude and arrogant to those who had taken the time to speak to them.
It’s time to replace the MAA board. They don’t represent the community — in fact, they don’t even listen to the community. — Tom Dimitre, Ashland
Yes means more problems
Those among you who’d like more traffic problems in Medford, please raise your hands. That is the issue before voters this November, when we will vote on a proposed amendment to Medford’s charter.
If passed, the charter amendment will most assuredly result in there being less state and federal money available in Medford to fix our existing (and future) transportation problems. This is because the proposed charter amendment will require us to vote on each agreement to be entered into
between the city and state or federal governments. Required votes will mean that Medford will never be able to meet the "project readiness" criteria that the state uses to allocate scarce transportation monies.
So, if you like traffic problems, vote yes on the amendment. If you’re like me, and want our transportation problems fixed, join me in voting no on the charter amendment. — Gary Swiderski, Medford
Hard to imagine
Regarding the 250 letters that Gov. Ted Kulongoski wrote to California businesses to invite them to move to Oregon, it’s hard to imagine that he could characterize Oregon as "a state without significant political upheaval ..." Perhaps he doesn’t think that a completely
partisan, deadlocked Legislature, a major budget deficit, and failing public school systems are really that significant. Or perhaps he is just confusing us with another state. — Fran Wing, Medford
Urging a no vote
On Oct. 8, there was a televised debate between a supporter and opponent of the charter amendment to be on Medford’s ballot this November. I was stunned by the evasiveness of supporter John Pearson, who repeatedly declined to defend the many flaws in the proposed charter
amendment that were pointed out during the debate.
If the amendment were to pass, it is my understanding that it would require future voter approval on complex legal agreements between Medford and the state each time some small traffic improvement is needed. Not only will this cost Medford dearly in lost state transportation dollars, the
cost of elections and lawsuits, but will set a bad precedent for the rest of the communities in Southern Oregon. I would strongly encourage a no vote. — Carlene Hester, Ashland
Vote no on 15-49
While serving on the Medford City Council, many of the decisions I made were difficult at best to vote on even after hours of research. While I believe that our citizens can do this job if asked, I also think they believe in a representative form of government, and that is why we elect a city
council.
What is next? A city council of 62,000 people.
I agree that a third interchange at South Stage appears to be a good idea, but what many don’t realize is that ODOT can’t build a new interchange until the adjacent interchanges are up to code with the feds. Maybe someday we will get a third interchange, but if Measure 15-49
passes, funding will be difficult because by the time we "vote" on the issue, the money will be allocated elsewhere in the state.
Please join me and vote no on measure 15-49. — Ed Chun, former Medford City Council member
|
