Sen. Wyden a good public servant
To the editor:
Public service is an honorable profession. It is also an extremely difficult one, especially if the public servant is an elected official. If he is elected by a majority of 51 percent he is still required to represent the wishes and needs of the 49 percent who disagree with him whatever their reasons might be.
An employee needs to know the basic skills of his job and to please his
employer; a doctor needs to know about the human body and mind and help
his patient's health problems as much as possible; a lawyer needs to
know about the laws pertaining to his client's problem and to promote
his interests; a politician is expected to know everything about
running the government and everything else, and to promote the well
being of all the people he represents no matter how much they disagree
with each other.
An employee, if dissatisfied, can look for another job; a doctor whose
patient thinks he has done harm has the protection of malpractice
insurance; a lawyer can refuse to accept a client; an elected public
official does not have these options and he needs to be able to
withstand being repeatedly maligned, to expect being intensely
scrutinized in all his activities past and present, public and private,
to be frequently blamed and seldom rewarded, to have the tongue of an
angel and the hide of a rhinoceros. How many of us are capable of doing
Doctors, lawyers and politicians are mostly good but a few are not. I
think Senator Wyden is a good public servant. Let us remember that we
hired him with our votes and those who failed to vote helped us to hire
him, by not voting for someone else.
Miriam "Gus" Aschim
Council was right on parking spaces
To the editor:
After reading all the articles with regard to supposed public safety
issues involving some parking places at the In and Out Drive-In, I
finally drove by that business to see for myself what the fuss was
about.After seeing for myself what was involved I have to say that I
totally agree with the decision by city council.And I might add that I
agree with the remarks made by Commissioner Beverly Calder in today's
paper with regard to an editorial written last week by the Herald.
It seems to me that even as a pedestrian, a person has a certain amount
of responsibility to be cognizant of what is going on around them, and
help prevent accidents as well as a driver of a motor vehicle. To
those commissioners who found that the parking situation at the In
and Out was a grave concern for public safety, I would have to ask,
how is that any more dangerous to public safety than backing out of a
parking spot at Safeway, Albertsons, Bi-Mart, Rite-Aid or any other
parking lot in this city.How is it any more hazardous to public safety
than the angled parking on some streets in town that almost prevent a
motorist from seeing if the intersection is safe to pass through or
not. How about the Ford dealership in town. Wouldn't backing out of
the parking there into traffic lanes constitute a public safety?
It just seems apparent to me that someone didn't get "their way" on
this and that's what all the hollering is about.City Council made the
right decision.Let's just leave it at that.
Councilor disagrees on purpose of minutes
To the editor:
Councilor Beverly Calder is wrong about the purpose of minutes of a
public meeting. It is apparently her belief that if a speaker is "of
order" the minutes must omit whatever statement was made. That is not
Oregon law requires that the minutes "give a true reflection of the
matters discussed at the meeting and the views of the participants." As
used in the statute, the word "participants" includes Assistant Public
Works Director Gary Van Patten, the gentleman to whom Ms. Calder
attributes the "outburst."
Mr. Van Patten spoke quietly as he always does. (Anyone who knows him
would doubt his capacity for outburst.) He did not speak out of order.
He spoke usefully and knowledgeably.