Baker City's Contribution to Democracy, Citizens On Patrol, Land Use Planning--Transportation Plan

I comment to Baker City government when I can and I ask for information routinely. Sometime my comments are treated with respect and responded to, usually by City staff, as opposed to Councilors. Often, certainly in the past, my comments to Council go down the memory hole, somewhere near the bottom of the digital trash can. Currently, at least prior to the last week or so, they are just ignored and never see the light of day, even in the local papers.

Just recently, Baker City has improved their ability to take comments from citizens.  I for one, have great difficulty speaking in public--especially to powerful people who I believe do not understand or  respect me--thats why I write a lot.  Others also do not feel comfortable expressing their opinions to Council at a Council meeting for various reasons, perhaps similar to mine, or, perhaps related to the class they find themselves in.  Now, anybody can post their concerns to the city on their website.  Just go to the "Latest News" link on the website and scroll down through the news to a subject that interests you. The website is currently very slow on my Mac, but maybe you will have a different experience.  They had a Google virus alert a few weeks ago during the transportation plan process when people were trying to access the necessary documents, but it seems to have been taken care of. It might take some patience. When your subject of interest shows up, read the info and at the bottom you may find a comment or two and an opportunity to comment yourself.

For example, for the "Citizen On Patrol Volunteer--Community Information Meeting" that occurred on June 20, 2013, they have:

The Baker City Police Department is seeking volunteers who want to make a difference in our community.

What Is The Citizen On Patrol Program (C.O.P.)? The Citizen on Patrol Program is a volunteer program that works hand-in-hand with the Baker City Police Department for the overall safety, health and vitality of the Baker City community.

What Do Citizen On Patrol Volunteers Do? Administrative Office Assistance; Emergency Evacuations; Elderly Checks; Vacation Property Checks; Ordinance Compliance Checks; Foot Patrol; Community Events; Evidence Room Assistance; Speed Monitoring.

Is There Training Available? YES! We offer regular and ongoing training opportunities! There is a new Training Program starting in July for qualified applicants! Don't delay!

To learn more about the Citizen on Patrol Volunteer Program (C.O.P), don't miss the community information meeting on June 20, 2013 at 6:00 p.m. at the Baker City Police Department , 1768 Auburn Avenue.

Everyone is welcome to attend.

For more information, please contact Lori McNeil, C.O.P Coordinator, lmcneil@bakercity.com or 524-2014 ext. 105.

My comments there are:

refugee2000 • Mike and City Council, I think "Ordinance Compliance Checks" should not be one of the duties of Citizens on Patrol. That sort of enforcement should be left to a hopefully professional police officer on the force, or better yet, to neighbors familiar with the situation. There is too much room for abuse due to political, personal, religious, and other agendas, or due to over-zealous volunteers.
More today:
My recollection is that when the Council passed the property maintenance ordinance, they said enforcement would target only the most egregious cases. I believe that was the word they used. It appears to me that those cases have been, or are in the process of being taken care of. Egregious cases are also easily spotted by the current code enforcement officer. Having a troop of volunteers snooping around the neighborhoods looking for violations seems to ratchet code enforcement up to a whole new level that was not intended by the Council that passed the property maintenance ordinance. Poor people might get the impression that they are living in the old Soviet Union or with the East German Stasi.
Yesterday I photographed a property on Dewey that Officer Davidson had requested a property maintenance case number for [the day earlier]. It seemed to me that they were in compliance because they had obviously kept their property up and the lawn looked like it had been mowed in the last week or two. They had a garden on the parkway that had some weeds like sweet clover in it, but some people don't consider them weeds, and those kind of gardens grow higher that the 10 inch requirement in the property maintenance ordinance in any event. If the City is going to target them for a violation, then they might as well target half the city. Is that where this is going???
I might mention that someone I know who had a husband In Iraq was given a citation, but it never turned up in the Press Log and was later dropped.
One person I talked to suggested that the City drop the punitive approach, and have the volunteers help these people with the volunteer's concerns, rather than turn them in for a suspected "violation" of the ordinance.
Sncerely,
Christopher Christie

Propert recently cited for PM Violation

Thinking about "property maintenance," it was interesting to see Bill Uttenreuther, 1410 Dewey, Baker City, in the city video at the Council meeting on June 11, 2013. Mr. Uttenreuther is a retired city firefighter (Family PERS income 38,000+/yr according to the Oregonian website) with a lot of time on his hands apparently, so he went before the Council to report on properties that, in his estimation, didn't pass muster. I'm surprised that he had the time, because I was under the impression that he spent a lot of it on our heavily subsidized golf course.  You know the one, it's the City golf course that Councilor Button and Kata Bulinski's back yard backs up to. Why Kata rarely, if ever, identifies herself as Clair's significant other when she's ranting to the Council, that her significant other sits on, about burn barrels and etc., is something I'll never quite understand. But then I've never understood either why Councilor Clair Button doesn't declare a potential or actual conflict of interest when he advances ever more taxpayer money to the golf course, which in my estimation, props up his property value, as it sits on the back nine holes. It's not like we need the money for all our ongoing and looming basic infrastructure expenses--we can always stick it to the ratepayers and we gotta keep that back nine green and gorgeous!

In response to the City Council's non-response about my concerns with the new transportation plan, I wrote:

May 29, 2013

RE: Public Hearing Testimony: Draft Update to the Transportation System Plan (TSP) 05/29/13

Dear Mr. Chairman and Members of the Commission:

While I believe the Draft TPS is a very good effort, I am here tonight speaking against it, as it is currently written. I speak for myself although I am aware of the opinions of a dozen neighbors who share my sentiments. My home has been on 15th Street since the summer of 2004, and during my time here I have experienced several detrimental changes in the way ordinances affecting private property and its use are written, interpreted, or implemented. Some of these ordinances have been imposed by people who know doubt meant well, but who do not share the economic, social or other values and interests related to land and land use that are shared by myself and most of my neighbors. Overly burdensome property maintenance and burning ordinances are two that come easily to mind, as well as a bombshell or two contained in the new Development Code.

I have two problems with this otherwise decent plan:

1) I did not know about the plan or that sidewalks were planned for 15th Street until I followed up on a recent notice that did not mention the sidewalks, and my neighbors did not know that sidewalks were planned for 15th Street until I mentioned it to them. That is
because Baker City does not really comply with Goal one for statewide planning, which is good communication of planning issues through a functional citizen involvement program.

2) My neighbors and I do not want sidewalks because they are not needed and some of us simply can’t afford them. The burden for sidewalks should fall on all citizens because all properties and the pedestrians served by them benefit somewhat equally from a sidewalk system. In some cases, including mine, there is no perceived benefit to the property owner because they are getting along fine as things currently are.

In more detail, I oppose the plan for the following reasons:

It is not consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 1 CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT, i.e., OAR 660-015-0000(1) which is “To develop a citizen involvement program that insures the opportunity for citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning process.” The goal, as well as ORS 197.160 (b) includes a requirement for “an officially recognized committee for citizen involvement (CCI) broadly representative of geographic areas and interests related to land use and land-use decisions.” Goal 1 also requires, that the CCI "involve a cross-section of affected citizens in all phases of the planning process." There are many other requirements to ensure public involvement and understanding as well, including the establishment of “Mechanisms . . . which provide for effective communication between citizens and elected and appointed officials,” with effective being the key word. The Goal also requires the establishment of an actual citizen involvement program. I believe that Baker City has clearly not complied with many of the requirements of Goal 1.

Baker City chose to assign the responsibility for the committee for citizen involvement to the Planning Commission, and to also use a Technical Advisory Committee and group of so-called “Stakeholders” to fulfill the citizen involvement requirements.

Both Goal 1 and the Oregon Revised Statute require that committees flowing from a "program for citizen involvement,” including the CCI, be "broadly representative of geographic areas and of interests relating to land uses and land use decisions." None of the committees, including the Planning Commission itself, comply with that requirement.

The Planning Commission, which is also the CCI, essentially comes from two geographic areas out of at least five or six in the city. One group of three Commissioners all live up on the hill in the high rent district of the South West area which looks down on the city. Two of those members are actually neighbors. They can not be said to share the economic, social and land use interests of a majority of the people in the areas near 15th Street or much of the rest of the city, and in fact, the low areas on the West side are not represented on the Planning Commission at all.

Three of the other four Commissioners live within a few blocks of each other in South Central Baker City, and the other lives about a mile to the North East in a very nice home worth many times that of his neighbors.

The Planning Commission, which is assigned the responsibility of the committee for citizen involvement, cannot be said to be “representative of geographic areas and interests related to land use and land-use decisions” in the City of Baker City.

The same can be said to the “Stakeolder” group and the Technical Advisory Committee if they are if fact included as an attempt to provide committee involvement that is “broadly representative of geographic areas and interests related to land use and land-use decisions” for the Citizens of Baker City.

I was told by the Planning Department that the PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT AND PROCEDURES FOR PLANNING section of the Comprehensive plan is supposed to be Baker City’s citizen involvement program. The fact is that there really isn’t any serious and effective citizen involvement program. That is why almost no one I spoke with on 15th Street knew that the plan called for sidewalks on their street.

The public involvement portion of the Baker City Comprehensive plan simply states:

1. The City will make all reasonable efforts to publicize planning issues and meetings where these issues will be discussed and decided upon.

Page 4 of the Baker City Comprehensive plan also states:

9 b) The City will attempt to gain media coverage of the issues and public notice of the proposed change will be advertised.

While the citizen involvement Goal requires involvement to include "a cross-section of affected citizens in all phases of the planning process" and asks that “Newsletters, mailings, posters, mail-back questionnaires, and other available media . . . be used in the citizen involvement program” to help establish “effective” communication, we get “reasonable efforts to publicize . . . issues and meetings” and “The City will attempt to gain media coverage. . . .”

I believe the efforts to communicate the specifics of the plan that are relevant to each affected homeowner have failed. The only written communication from the Planning Department to individual property owners, during what apparently has been a months long process, went out a few weeks ago, and it did not specify how the owner was going to be affected or how they might be financially threatened by the plan. Everyone I’ve spoken with did not realize they were facing potential financial risk. The Herald delivers to around 1900 homes and businesses. This would be about 41% coverage if all of the deliveries were to homes but less if one included the approximately 1,197 businesses. Of course, a percentage of these deliveries are going to renters, and etc, so actual coverage of property owners is difficult to gauge. In any event it is not likely over 50%. Many of these subscribers do not always read the paper or a particular article, as was the case for a neighbor in the next block. The radio ads are similar as many don’t listen to the station that the city uses. About the only nearly sure-fire way to get someone’s attention is a notice with a specific attention notice on the outside and specific information showing the nature of the potential threat to the homeowner. The suggested questionnaire with a map showing where particular projects were being planned would have shown a true desire to communicate the potential affects of the draft plan.

Of the twelve people in my neighborhood I spoke with in the last few days, only two had the slightest notion that a new TSP revision was in the works, and none, I repeat, none, knew that sidewalks were planned for 15th Street. In addition, none of them thought sidewalks were necessary. Several thought it was a foolish use of money because there are few pedestrians on 15th Street, and that the needs, if any, are on 16th and 14th Streets. Those I spoke with think our limited funds should go to the many other expensive higher priority infrastructure projects facing Baker City.

The existence of Head Start Baker school and the old Churchill School building in the 1900 block of 16th, and Blue Mountain Community College at the corner of 14th and Baker Streets were also discussed by neighbors and we wondered why the streets adjacent to these destinations were not slated for sidewalk development or ADA compliance.

It is puzzling that the plan chose 15th Street instead of 14th and 16th with their schools and institutional buildings, given that Table 7, on p. 40 of Volume 2, which lists “Potential Improvement to Bicycle and Pedestrian Conditions” states that the plan should “Prioritize sidewalk improvements along a network of routes that provide access to schools….” Hmmm, sounds like 16th or 14th might need [sidewalks] for schools if the path on 17th isn’t judged adequate.

It doesn’t appear that the planners have any objective data in the form of actual pedestrian counts for 15th Street. I can testify as one who spends a lot of time in front of a computer looking out the front window that it is usually between 3 and 10, with 6 being the most frequently observed number. More people walk up 15th to Court, then over to 14th, and up to Broadway. ODOT may have traffic counts, but they too are low, especially compared to 17th or 16th near the Head Start program.

The plan also states in Volume 2, that “On roadways with low traffic volumes (i.e., less than 3,000 vehicles per day), roadway shoulders can be adequate for pedestrian travel. These roadways . . . should have shoulders wide enough so that both pedestrians and bicyclists can use them, usually six feet or greater. ( p. 24, Baker City Transportation System Plan Volume II – Appendices)

The draft states “…many roadways in the outer portions of Baker City lack sidewalks. Many of these streets are wide and have light traffic, making them comfortable for walking and bicycling.” ( p. 28, Baker City Transportation System Plan Volume II – Appendices)

The Baker City Comprehensive Plan also says on p. 26:

Transportation Goal Finding 10

10. Sidewalks are now found in nearly all areas of town with streets developed to primary standard. In other areas, existence of sidewalks is spotty, but less critical due to the nature of the development and, in general, the volume of foot traffic.

The above three statements from the two different planning documents are good descriptions of 15th Street. The shoulders are adequate for the few pedestrians to get off the road if they choose and the traffic is light. There is no need for unaffordable sidewalks on 15th Street, and the paths planned along Auburn and up 17th would serve as adequate neighborhood connectors. Removing some of these unnecessary sidewalk plans would put fewer people at financial risk and make it more likely that funds can be found to complete the projects that are actually needed. The prevailing attitude in my neighborhood is that if it ain’t broke, don’t spend large sums of money or saddle people with unnecessary debt to “fix it.”

I hope the Commission will both reconsider the plan and comply with the intent of Statewide Planning Goal1, for true communication and citizen involvement.

Thanks for listening,
Christopher Christie

OK, so they cut me off and all those comments were pretty much ignored by the Planning Commission--that's Baker. There was certainly no rational response, and my comments seemed to be completely ignored by the Council too, as they too didn't respond. (I guess the message is, "Hey, that's Baker, get used to it poor boy. Too bad you don't have the $400.00 it takes to start an appeal.")

The Planning Department has continued to send relevant information, after the local  transportation plan process is over, and which I had asked for some time ago. At least they are belatedly trying! Turns out that Mr. Tim Collins, a current member of the Planning Commission and PERS retiree (annual family benefit $85,106) who lives up on the hill above the golf course, was involved as a City Attorney back in 1981, at which time he and the Council had the duties of the Committee for Citizen Involvement turned over to the Planning Commission. The Planning Department and I are currently trying to find evidence of whether Mr. Collins ever received a letter from the state with recommendations, and which also approved the change.

I.E. The Statewide Planning Goal 1 requires that: 

a letter shall be submitted to the Land Conservation and Development Commission for the state Citizen Involvement Advisory Committee's review and recommendation stating the rationale for selecting this option, as well as indicating the mechanism to be used for an evaluation of the citizen involvement program.

There is, as of now, no evidence produced that indicates a review by the state that would justify the Planning Commission serving as the Committee for Citizen Involvement, and in any event, the current Planning Commission is not "broadly representative of geographic areas and interests related to land use and land-use decisions” and does not "involve a cross-section of affected citizens in all phases of the planning process," so could not in any rational mind be construed to comply with the requirements of Statewide Planning Goal 1 for the Committee for Citizen Involvement.

In response to a note from the City on the matter, I responded:

Thank you . . . .,

I do realize that most residents are not yet aware of the opportunity to comment on the City website, just as they were not aware of the specific changes being recommended by the transportation plan. I think what you and the city administration have done to facilitate this communication is great progress for Baker City democracy if and when people become aware of it. The more Baker City enables people to become involved through the communication advances provided by the internet and etc., the better off we will be in understanding what Baker City citizens would like to see happening in their city and in their neighborhoods. One problem, of course, is that many of our older or lower income citizens may not possess a computer, or may not be computer literate.

I gave my comments to the Planning Commission at their meeting on May 29th, and I was told that the comments were included in the packets for the Council at the June 11th meeting. I also sent my comments to the Council prior to the June 11, 2013 meeting using the email addresses available on the city website at http://www.bakercity.com/city-.... None of them have responded to date.

I have received additional information today from the Planning Department, but they have yet to find a response on the the final recommendation from the CIAC concerning their assigning the Committee for Citizens Involvement to the Planning Commission, which is, as I read it, required by law. As the Planning Commission membership changes from year to year, one might hope that the City would seek the CIAC's approval to make sure that the Commission is in compliance with Statewide Planning Goal 1, which is that the CCI "involve a cross-section of affected citizens in all phases of the planning process." Additionally, both Goal 1 and the Oregon Revised Statute require that committees flowing from a "program for citizen involvement,” including the CCI, be "broadly representative of geographic areas and of interests relating to land uses and land use decisions." None of the committees, including the Planning Commission itself, comply with that requirement. As I note in my comments from May 29 above, the current Planning Commission is not "broadly representative" of the citizens of Baker City, and most certainly is not representative of those of us who live west of the tracks and south of the railroad overpass on Dewey/Hwy 7.

I would recommend that the City arrange for a Committee for Citizens Involvement that "involve[s] a cross-section of affected citizens in all phases of the planning process." and that is "broadly representative of geographic areas and of interests relating to land uses and land use decisions." Some neighborhoods do not share the land use values of those who choose to live downtown or in the newer neighborhoods, and we still cherish our rural, not so spic and span, rural atmosphere. Sometimes the City has to personally ask people from the various neighborhoods to be involved, or otherwise they might not take announcements of calls for committee membership seriously--that is as actually include them. There are those who have opinions but who are reticent to give them for various reasons. That is why questionnaires sent to citizens, as recommended by the State's discussion on Planning Goal 1, should be used early in the process. I would also recommend that the City inform citizens not just about a process that is occurring, but that the City inform citizen property owners by mail of the specific changes being suggested for their neighborhood as soon as those changes are floated by the connected folks involved on the committees creating the plan.

I appreciate you for your response and would thank you for fair consideration of my comments,

Christopher Christie
1985 15th Street,
Baker City

OK, enough of the opportunities for comment--you really should use the City's comment facility if you have concerns.  They do require an email address, which may be a problem for some that are afraid of retribution, like City employees or. . . .
_______________
_______________

Baker City--All Cops On the Poor, All the Time!

Persecuting the Old & Poor--I feel so much safer now!
[Edited 4/9/11]

If the Baker City Council, City Manager Mike Kee (& ex Police Chief of Ontario, OR), the "Justice" Court, and Baker City Police Department, have ever, and I mean ever, overstepped the bounds of moral, ethical, civil, and sensible human conduct, it was during the last month or four, when code enforcement officer Shannon Regan and Chief Wynn Lohner, allowed the police, under the color of law, using a very misguided and classist intstrument in the form of City Ordinance 3292 , to persecute two older, 80 plus year old people, and a disabled tenant, on Court Street in our "fair" town of Baker City. Their "crime?" Allowing "stuff" to be accumulated on their already ramshackle old property in an out of the way poor neighborhood that is already full of "stuff" and ramshackle old properties. Hang' em high, right?

In a supposedly "democratic" country where the Wall Street fat cats go free after causing a global collapse, and where we deny millions of our people basic health care (& etc.), where "You have 25 percent—almost 25 percent of the income in the upper one percent," (Stiglitz, Democracy Now!), and where BakerCity's own infrastructure is crumbling, Baker City spends tax dollars persecuting the poor. You can read it every day in the "crime" reports. Some of the folks are actually potential threats, but "stuff" piling up on the property of 80+ year olds in an out of the way poor section of town next to a dilapidated industrial zone? I'm sorry, but Baker City government has run amok.

See Baker City Herald:
Code enforcement conundrum

The article above is a must read for at least part of the story.

See also City Manager, ex-Police Chief Mike Kee touting it as an achievement:
Baker City Weekly Report, April 8, 2011.

Please notice in the city's photos that poor is still poor, ramshackle is still ramshackle (Although they cherry-picked the "after" photos.), even after the city ran up incomplete charge of $1,780, not including your taxpayer dollars for the officer's time for the persecution.

This is the latest evolution of the classist persecution of poor people that began most visibly when the police and City Council went after a disabled life-long Baker City resident back in 2009.

Background articles:

SUNDAY, MAY 17, 2009
Property Maintenance Jihad Targets Disabled Life-long Baker City Resident

FRIDAY, JUNE 5, 2009
Democracy In Baker City, Plus Calder Update (YouTube)

MONDAY, JANUARY 11, 2010
Law, Order, and Perhaps a Little Justice?


After the Ron Calder fiasco, the City Council, composed of business people, an old locally grown "Judge," a well off retired government employee, a mindless ex-sheriff's deputy, and a librarian, passed a tightened ordinance that they believe allows them to continue the persecution of the poor in Baker City. That is the ordinance that the police and the "Justice" Court used to go after defenseless poor and (really) old people recently. Given that the number of police, and their budget, in some measure depends upon "crimes" prosecuted and "prevented," I believe the ex-police chief City Manager uses these attacks on old people, and other incidents, in an effort to pad the police budget. It used to be called Fascism, now it is business as usual.

Please note that the ordinance, written to please some well off property owners, realtors, and hopeless anal-retentives, as well as the Council, says that:

"The general rule of nuisance law as established by centuries of legal precedent is that no one has absolute freedom in the use of his or her property, but is restrained by the coexistence of equal rights in his or her neighbor to the peaceful, safe, and enjoyable use of their property, so that each, in exercising his or her right, must do no act which causes injury to his neighbor.

The City Council further finds that unsafe, unsanitary, and otherwise improperly maintained premises and structures within the City of Baker City adversely affect the value, utility, and habitability of the property within the city as a whole. In addition to the obvious hazards which these conditions pose to public health, safety, and welfare; they specifically cause substantial damage to adjoining and nearby property."

The Council has added the clauses, of questionable legal validity, that "otherwise improperly maintained premises and structures within the City of Baker City adversely affect the value, utility, and habitability of the property within the city as a whole." and "they specifically cause substantial damage to adjoining and nearby property." Hopefully, the poor among us will find the resources to contest the legal complexities and vagueness of the claims, and the corollary that in order to live in peace with the rich or otherwise comfortable, we must not adversely affect the value of their property (even if we don't possess the will and money to do otherwise).
__

George Carlin - It's a big club and you ain't in it

Don Williams as Justice of the Peace Pro-Tem???????

[Edited with significant revisions, 6/22/10]

Good Lord! I knew we had some problems with "Justice" in Baker County, but will the County Commissioners really appoint Don Williams as an impartial Justice of the Peace Pro-Tem?? How bad can it get? I mean, don't they know that there are sane, legally trained people who could handle the job right here in Baker County??? First they want the elected JP's husband to take on there job as substitute (any conflicts there?), then Gary Marlette, and now they want to appoint a known partisan (extreme in my opinion), whose political views run in the completely opposite direction of the electorate as witnessed by the last recall election (the recall he promoted lost in a landslide). Mr. Williams statements and letters also seem to advocate unconstitutional promotion of sectarian prayer at City Council meetings and reveal a lack of compassion for some citizens affected by poverty. Who's next, Brian Cole?? Such an appointment will bring no "justice" or "peace" to Baker City. Commissioners, please get a grip--we do not need any intolerant and divisive personalities determining the fate of our citizens.

Here is the text of the announcement from the Commissioners office:

Agenda:06/23/2010 Commission Session Agenda

1. Call to Order/Pledge of Allegiance

2. Citizen’s Participation:
a.
3. Review/Approval of Minutes:
a. June 2, 2010 Commission Session Minutes
. . . .

6. Documents to be Signed
a. Order No. 2010-144: Re-appointing Kurt Miller to the Transient Lodging
Tax Marketing Committee
b. Order No. 2010-145: Designating a paper of record
c. Order No. 2010-146: Appointing Don Williams as a Justice of the Peace Pro-Tem

I realize that the religious fanatics and anal retentives will applaud his seemingly irrational arguments, but I address my plea to the rational--do you want a man with these views dispensing "justice" in Baker County??? Would people affected by poverty and/or with property maintenance issues be treated fairly by Mr. Williams?

Don Williams statements, as recorded by the Baker City Herald:

Recall vote is justified

October 09, 2009

To the editor:
A serious absence of ethics: In May of this year, when considering the adoption of a property maintenance ordinance, Steve Brocato had the code enforcement officer survey properties owned by city councilors for compliance with the proposed ordinance. Several councilors owned properties which were not in compliance.

On May 26, one of those councilors, Bev Calder, wrote a scathing letter condemning the proposed ordinance. My letter to the editor on June 22 informed readers the genesis of her ire was most likely found in the fact that she owns and perpetuates one of the worst derelict buildings in the city, located at 1620 Valley Ave. A fact which she did not mention in her letter.

She, Dennis Dorrah and two fellow counselors colluded, (with the exclusion of three of their elected colleagues) and on June 9 fired Mr. Brocato. Over the last two months, Ms. Calder with her colleagues, assured the “derelict building” language was removed from the proposed ordinance. She voted and passed that ordinance, which, in my opinion will allow her to let her building rot in perpetuity at the expense of her neighbors, while the code will require her constituents to deal with their messy yards, and cover non-operating vehicles.

Mr. Brocato’s firing for his bedside manner in dealing with the council and a few incessant complainers, may be arguable. The surreptitious and unethical manner in which he was dismissed by these councilors, is not. By conducting the above survey, (one of his last acts as city manager), Mr. Brocato tried to assure the residents of Baker of the transparency and integrity of the ruling council, qualities that by their action, prove to be very foreign to Ms. Calder and Mr. Dorrah. A recall vote is justified.

Don Williams
Baker City

Council to vote on property rules July 28
Written by MIKE FERGUSON Baker City Herald July 15, 2009 03:19 pm

With one minor change made Tuesday, the Baker City Council will consider a proposed Property Maintenance Code for the first time during its next meeting July 28.

Following first and second readings that night, the new nuisance ordinance could become law as soon as Aug. 11.

. . . .
Interim City Manager Tim Collins said the proposal will actually strengthen the city’s enforcement ability, making it quicker because it removes the requirement that the city send a third set of notices to property owners who are in violation.

That action will place enforcement actions in Municipal Court faster, he told councilors.

This pleased Councilor Milo Pope.

“I desperately want us to adopt this ordinance as it exists,” he said, “and let us get to the business of enforcing this. We can’t keep wollying it around and piddling with it. Let’s assure these folks it will be the agenda at our next meeting and we will start the adoption process.”

. . . .
Don Williams pointed out that the proposed ordinance doesn’t address “perpetual garage sales” in which “inside furniture is being stored outside.”


Collins said he couldn’t find a prohibition against perpetual garage sales in other city ordinances, either, but said he didn’t believe the new ordinance was the place to address the problem.

Suzanne Moses said that in her 15 years living in Baker City, it’s apparent “we’re moving in the right direction” with cleaning up problem properties. “The contrast with how things were 15 years ago is remarkable, and I think it’s important to keep that in mind.”

Alice Lentz said that her work in social services has helped convince her that people do take pride in their community, but that “some people will say, ‘Don’t touch my junk,’ and if it’s not a safety hazard, I’m right there with them. There is a shared responsibility to improve our world and to leave it a better place than we found it, but on what level? On beauty, or on solid safety and community issues, and that is where I’d like to see the emphasis put. I don’t want to see people being portrayed as bad characters.”

In a letter to Collins and City Councilors, Barbara Fleming made a similar point.

“I realize government has a role to play,” she wrote. “Threat of liens are no doubt effective, but seem to me unfair. They suggest an uncaring attitude. I see more a poor, old, tired or jobless person needing assistance.”

Collins said that under the new ordinance, the whole process, from the moment Regan has an initial talk with the property owner to the time the city abates the problem, could be as little as two months.

“Two months for the wheels of justice to turn is exceedingly quick,” Collins said. “That is the quickest that you could expect action.”


The proposed ordinance is available online at www.bakercity.com.

Renovation record speaks for itself

June 26, 2009

To the editor:
Mr. Williams’ letter regarding my property on Valley Street is nothing more than mean-spirited propaganda. The building has been an eyesore for many, many years.  Recently it was under threat of demolition and I decided to “rescue” the former church and drug treatment center and turn it into something that contributes to the neighborhood.  

This building could be a neighborhood center; a gathering place for the east Baker neighborhood with facilities for family gatherings, art and dance classes, maybe even an elderhostel for travelers visiting Baker City and exploring our history and enjoying our community.   

My house on Dewey Street, purchased in ’93, contained over five dump truck loads of rotting garbage, animal hides and offal. The yard was even worse. It took years to transform that hovel into the beautiful home it is today, but I believe it has had a positive impact on my neighborhood.

Baker City is still a land of opportunity. I was able to afford to purchase a home here on my own, even though I bought something most people would condemn and declare hopeless. All it took was some time, some hard-earned money and a lot of elbow grease and sweat.  

Many “derelict” properties in Baker City have been revitalized. The list is long and includes some of our most beautiful homes and buildings. I don’t have deep pockets, a trust fund, or a job funded by taxpayers. But I do work hard and have put everything I’ve earned into creating jobs in Baker City that support families and reinvesting in my community.  

Since purchasing the Valley Street property last year, I’ve tried to keep the yard mowed (between rain showers) and the sidewalks clear. All of the broken windows have been removed and stabilized with plywood. There are no cats nor transients living in the basement and there are no violations of city ordinances. I didn’t make the old church an eyesore, but it is my goal to make it something the neighborhood will enjoy and benefit from.  

Beverly Calder
City Councilor
Baker City


Councilor Should Clean up Property

June 22, 2009

To the editor:

In Councilor Beverly Calder’s letter to the editor of May 26, she decries the proposed new property maintenance ordinance and calls any such attempt of city government to govern the open storage of trash, or one’s failure to maintain structures, “un-American.”

What Ms. Calder failed to disclose in her communication is the most likely impetus for her objections to the proposed ordinance supported by Mr. Brocato; that is, she is the owner of a building in Baker City that would be considered a derelict building and a nuisance under even the most forgiving and liberal definition contained in any such ordinance. If the proposed ordinance is passed, she too would most likely be held responsible for the respectful maintenance of her property.

I am a homeowner on Valley Avenue, in the area between Resort and East streets. Recently, several neglected and unsafe structures have been razed, or revitalized; however, one building in particular in the area stands in constant neglect, and continues to diminish the value of homes nearby. That building is located at 1620 Valley Ave. Once a church, it has long since been abandoned. Its windows are broken out, its cement is crumbling, its asbestos siding is broken, and electrical wiring and conduit hang from its exterior walls. Its unsecured basement is home to a myriad of feral cats, and has been used by homeless probation clients.

It is owned by Councilor Calder, and stands as a monument of disrespect and hypocrisy toward her own community. I would encourage readers to drive by and take a look, and ask yourself if you would like it next to your home. Our elected leaders have a responsibility to set examples as citizens who demonstrate respect for their city, their community and the property values of their neighbors and constituents. If anyone should recuse themselves on casting a vote on this issue, or even serving in a position of City leadership, it should be Ms. Calder. Her time would be better spent showing some respect to her Valley Avenue constituents by doing some significant clean up, renovation, and/or demolition.

Don Williams
Baker City

Re-elect Tim Kerns to commission

October 23, 2008

To the editor:

In Baker County we have a candidate who merits your vote; a candidate who fits the bill to continue to provide good leadership and a voice of reason to county politics: Tim Kerns. 

. . . .
Don Williams
Baker City


Council's prayer policy a rarity

August 19, 2008 11:00 pm

To the editor:
In this letter, I continue my comments about prayer at city council meetings, which you published a couple of weeks ago.
On July 22, the issue before city council was supposed to be just a housekeeping change in the invocation policy: remove the word "nonpartisan" and replace it with "nonsectarian." Councilors Beverly Calder and Andrew Bryan had both championed such a change at the preceding city council meeting. But at the July 22 city council meeting, Councilor Calder moved to exclude both terms from the invocation policy, thus leaving the door as wide open as before for all kinds of unconstitutional sectarian prayers, i.e., prayers identified with a particular religion. The motion passed unanimously.

During the discussion before the vote, Don Williams opined that not allowing sectarian prayers was "intolerant." Councilor Terry Schumacher claimed it was in fact illegal to prohibit sectarian prayers at government meetings. (He failed to cite any legal source to back up his claim.)

From their comments, it's pretty clear that Williams and Schumacher are not aware that in the whole state of California it is illegal to say sectarian prayers at city council meetings.


Here's the background for the leading California case. In 1999 Irv Rubin, a Jew, and Roberto Alejandro Gandara, a Catholic, sued the city of Burbank for saying prayers that ended in "in Jesus' name." Rubin and Gandara prevailed over the city of Burbank at trial and before the California Court of Appeals. Both the California and U. S. Supreme courts refused to overturn the decision.

Here's what the court ordered in Rubin v. city of Burbank: City councils may not say sectarian prayers at their meetings and must instruct members of the public invited to give invocations that prayers must be nonsectarian.

P.S.: Invocations are not part of the agenda at city council meetings in 97.5 percent of the 234 municipalities in Oregon, and are not included in meetings of six of the seven city councils in Baker County. Baker City Council is pretty much out there all alone in mixing religion and government in Oregon.

Gary Dielman
Baker City


Who's the greater authority?

July 29, 2008

To the editor:

I'm writing in to comment on the prayer issue from the July 23 paper.

Don Williams put a warning out that if councilors give up the practice of opening meetings with prayer, churches would stop entering floats in parades and offering Easter sunrise services in public parks.

Tammy Marie
Baker City


Council decides prayers will continue

July 22, 2008 11:00 pm
By MIKE FERGUSON
Baker City Herald

The prospect of taking away the prayer that opens many Baker City Council meetings, it turns out, never had a prayer.
. . . .
Don Williams said he worried that instructing people how to pray would "make God generic, a meaningless and uninvited guest to this forum."

Even allowing sectarian prayers, he said, shows "a broad tolerance of what this country is about."

"You have been very tolerant of all prayers, and now you're being asked to be intolerant," Williams said.
He warned that if councilors give up the practice of opening meetings with prayer, churches would stop entering floats in parades and offering Easter sunrise services in public parks.

Bill Harvey, who lives in Haines but owns a Baker City construction business, called it "a joy" to pray for "wisdom, guidance, strength and help."

"I am human, and I can't make all the decisions on my own," he said. "I am sure tonight that many are praying for our city."
Gary Dielman, who sparked Tuesday's discussion when he criticized a prayer offered by Bob Vanderbilt to open the July 8 City Council meeting —Vanderbilt closed his prayer with the words "In Jesus' name, amen," — did not attend Tuesday's meeting.
Dielman declined to comment until he'd heard a tape of Tuesday's meeting.

Councilor Terry Schumacher said he hoped Dielman would take the hint from the outpouring of public support for prayer at council meetings "and quit coming back and doing this."

But Councilor Beverly Calder said that dissent is "an American right" and "quite often represents other unspoken voices."
Councilor Andrew Bryan was one of the few who "saw the logic" of putting a charter change on the ballot to let voters decide whether to include prayer and the reciting of the Pledge of Allegiance on City Council meeting agendas.

"If we want an invocation and the Pledge, we want to set it on the hardest rock we have," he said. "If people really want the invocation and Pledge, the best way to assure that is to put it in the charter."

"You can put it in the charter or paint it on a wall," countered Councilor Dennis Dorrah. "That still won't change Mr. Dielman or someone else coming in here and raising heck about it."

At least the issue drew a crowd to Tuesday night's meeting, Calder noted.

"You came because this matter is important to you," she told the full house. "It's nice to have full council chambers. I wish we could have something this meaty at every meeting."


Maybe San Jose shows the way

April 23, 2008 11:00 pm

To the editor:
I have followed with interest the recent letter to the editor from Ms. Norick, and the responses it has generated. I must admit I agree with Ms. Norick's opinion (but with a softer approach) regarding the trashy condition in which some people choose to keep their yards in Baker City. It clearly has a negative effect upon the city's image.

I'll not spend much energy responding to the allegation blaming poverty, created by super capitalism, as a fabricated excuse for some folks who choose to collect trash in their yards. Heck, it may even be a psychological reaction to global warming! One thing for sure, though, it has to be the fault of government or some entity (certainly not the owner of the trash). Regardless of the cause, given the current price of steel, one may climb the economic ladder just a little bit higher if they'd give the scrap dealer a call to buy that ol' heap in their yard.

The exchange of opinions on this issue also prodded me to do a little research into the annals of the San Jose Mercury News, where I found an article of May 21, 2006, describing the Strong Neighborhoods Initiative, launched by Mayor Ron Gonzales, who is working with citizens to clean up neighborhoods. Even the infamous "poverty ridden" Richmond-Menker neighborhood has tackled gang and drug problems and has cleaned apartment complexes providing safe play areas for children. Imagine that: poor people cleaning their neighborhood ... how antithetical. Strong code enforcement is also credited with the success of this program.

No response has invalidated Ms. Norick's observation. We need to look for solutions rather than excuses. It would be nice to see our city leadership take the issue of this obvious eyesore seriously. More can be learned by visiting www.strongneighborhoods.org.

Don Williams
Baker City