Letters to the Editor for Jan. 22, 2010

Time to cut off the Legislature

Our votes are in on Measures 66 & 67.  We voted no on both measures, and we encourage you to do the same. Why? Because we are tired of our state government having a one-track mind (tax and spend). Also, we’re tired of the same old saw of trotting out the argument that our police, schools and fire departments will be the ones to suffer if we don’t pass these tax-raising measures. What about the businesses and employees (and yes, customers) who will suffer if the measures pass? If businesses are forced to close or lay off employees, it will certainly affect our schools, police and fire departments

Until our government finally decides that it’s time to start cutting expenses and being fiscally responsible, instead of looking to the taxpayers to continually fund out-of-control spending, we will continue to vote “no” on measures such as these.

Gosh! I would compare their spending habits to a bunch of drunken sailors, but that wouldn’t be fair to the sailors because at least they know that when you run out of money, you stop spending.

Malcolm and Ruth Townsend

Baker City

Ice, slush, water: Hazards for shoppers

In reading your article “Council considering options for snow berms” of Jan. 15, I see no mention of curbs/gutters and crosswalks. I prefer to shop Baker. Most business/building owners are very good about clearing the sidewalks but the curbs/gutters at corners and crosswalks seem to be forgotten. I find it very dangerous to come over the curbs/gutters and into the crosswalks, as a pedestrian. If you stay within one block you are fine but if you wish to cross the street, it is a challenge. By the time you navigate the ice on the curb and gutter areas, you look up and see that you only have 5-8 seconds to cross a slippery street. By the time the curbs/gutters start to clear of ice the plows push snow from the berms through the crosswalks, to spread the snow out to melt. Now the curb area is better but the crosswalk is a mess.

I had a nice conversation with Tom Fisk, the city’s street supervisor, and asked if a crew from the prison could work on these areas, if the city couldn’t afford to. The corners could also use the clearing of the grates on the storm drains so that once melting occurs the water would have some place to travel to. Tom said he would look into it. He also said he would talk to his crews about lowering the blades on the plows when they go through the crosswalks. Ice, slush, water: These components are all very discouraging and hazardous for a shopper traveling on foot.

Did I read the article correctly? A councilor stated, “It is unnecessary for this Council to fuss about stores.” He didn’t really say that, did he? Is it not part of the work of a City Council to oversee a plan for a positive outlook for the present and future of the City they represent? Does this not include support for the local businesses to prosper and to make your city attractive to other businesses? Does he not care if I, or others, shop or do business in Baker City?

Liz Starkey

Baker City

Forest fee plan hurts seniors

I just became aware of a proposal by the Chief of the Forest Service to increase the fees paid by disabled persons and senior citizens to use recreation sites in the National Forests by 80 percent. This outrageous idea, if adopted, would make both Golden Age and Golden Access Passports essentially worthless, reneging on assurances made to disabled and older users when the fee program was established.

The proposal is apparently justified by the idea that it would increase income to campground concession operators and reduce fees paid by younger people. There is no assurance that younger people would pay less just because older people pay more. It seems more likely that concessionaires would just pocket the increase.

The proposal appears to have been poorly publicized. I don’t recall any mention of it in either of our local newspapers, even though both usually take a lot of interest in anything affecting National Forest users.

I urge anyone who uses National Forest fee sites to send comments online to www.regulations.gov (search for Notice ID FS-2009-0001) or by mail to U.S. Forest Service, Attn: Carolyn Holbrook, Recreation and Heritage Resource Staff, 1400 Independence Ave. SW, Stop 1125, Washington, D.C., 20250-1125. Time is short. Deadline for comments is Feb. 1.

Bill Fessel

Baker City

Student says no to tax measures

I am a student at Baker High School and I have some things to say about Measures 66 and 67.

In spite of the current economy, our state Legislature has increased state spending by $4.7 billion. Instead of paying heed to our double-digit unemployment rate and loss of income and businesses, our legislators have voted to raise taxes by $733 million on business and personal income. Independent economists have estimated these permanent tax increases would cost 70,000 Oregonians their jobs. These tax increases are also retroactive to Jan. 1, 2009. No money to cover this increase has been withheld from Oregonians’ paychecks during all of 2009. If that isn’t frightening enough, to add insult to financial injury Oregon government employees increased their salaries by a combined $259 million.

Legislators claim, as always, that their plan only taxes the rich. The new corporate tax would tax businesses up to $100,000, even if they didn’t make a profit. More than 70 percent of the proposed personal income tax increase applies to small businesses owned by individuals, the “rich people.” Small businesses would be forced to lay off their workers, reduce wages and benefits, or close their doors. Some farmers will be especially hard hit. The Department of Revenue says these measures would create double taxation on certain farmers who are members of cooperatives.

Middle and poor classes are also affected. We’ll end up paying more for groceries, gas, medical and other services. The state has $3.3 billion in unappropriated funds. They have not spent it but they still are raising taxes to cover shortfalls they created at a time when entire families are out of work. We can’t afford taxes that will cost us our jobs.

The campaign for measures 66 & 67 has outspent us by more than $1 million. Where is this money coming from? ACORN? Government employees? Unions who are already being exempted from every tax imaginable by Congress and the Legislature, (pay increases, Cadillac health care plans, and retirement plans)? 

Don’t be fooled by scare tactics. As a student and first-time voter, join me and local businesses by voting no on Measures 66 and 67.

Kyle Knight

Baker City

Volunteer county campaign manager

Vote No on Measures 66 & 67