Letters to the Editor - April 11, 2014
Important to protect animals
When a horrific animal abuse case reaches the point of being prosecuted, which most are not, it is inevitable that someone will complain about how we prosecute people for animal abuse but not abortion. In this case, Joanne Williamson did so in her letter (Readers’ Forum, March 28).
Then the clincher question is always asked, as Joanne did, “Are cats more important than people?”
As someone who advocates for the kind and humane treatment of animals, I have heard this ridiculous argument made time and again. Such people should be ashamed of themselves for suggesting that we not prosecute animal abuse until the laws governing abortion are changed. Stripping away the laws that allow the prosecution of animal abuse would not save one unborn baby.
To think so is illogical and mean-spirited. The truth is that a society that prosecutes animal abuse takes an important step towards protecting children. In one study of families where a child was abused, it was found that pets had also been abused in 88 percent of the families.
Deal with the abuse of animals, and you may save the life of the pet and a child.
Being resentful that our justice system might prosecute a person who has tortured six cats to death while still allowing abortions is just plain ugly. Don’t try to scapegoat our laws prosecuting animal abuse.
Be instead grateful that, by reporting animal abuse, the way may open to help children in situations where violence prevails — that is, if you can care about a child’s life after birth as much as before.
Property tax relief?
I would like to let Yamhill County taxpayers know what kind of choice we have made by electing Allen Springer to a county commissioner position.
He has many years of experience running his own contracting business, so you might think he would be aware of the potential implications of his statement, reported in the News-Register on Feb. 21: “You have to make a profit. Otherwise, you’re really a nonprofit, whether you want to be one or not.”
His statement suggested that use of Evergreen Museum office space by the for-profit side of Evergreen shouldn’t have affected museum property taxes because Evergreen Aviation wasn’t making a profit. Does he really mean that? Shouldn’t the museum pay property taxes for non-exempt uses, just like anyone else?
In 1994, I was a dairy farmer in Yamhill County, and I had to declare bankruptcy because my for-profit business became unprofitable. With all of that, I was not relieved of any of my tax obligations to Yamhill County or any other taxes owed.
It’s doubtful that even the power of a sitting commissioner could accomplish such a miracle today. But if you own a for-profit business in Yamhill County and you are struggling with losses, it wouldn’t hurt to ask for help from Commissioner Springer.
Todd E. Holt
Reconsider roofing exclusion
Regarding “Exclusion of Washington Roofing upheld” (News-Register April 4), I am disappointed the school board chose to take the advice of an architect from Roseburg and a couple of roofing firms in Portland rather than listen to Eric Wolff.
Anyone who has ever worked with Eric Wolff will tell you he is an impeccably honest, sincere individual. If Eric Wolff says he can install a better system than BUR, less expensively, I don’t need to check out the bonifides of the “consultant” the board hired; I’m going with Eric’s recommendation.
I don’t buy the “can’t change the bidding process in midstream” argument. If reasonable people can see that the process is leading to a faulty decision, they should change the process. I don’t care where you are in the stream, get the decision right. That is what you were elected to do.
I do not doubt the veracity of the school board members, and I appreciate the time they take from their busy lives to serve our children. But I ask them to re-evaluate this decision. Don’t be encumbered by procedure.
Here’s an experiment for each board member: Ask the next 50 people you see what they know about Eric Wolff and Washington Roofing; you will hear words like honest, expertise, hard-working and community-minded.
Just because you paid a consultant doesn’t mean he’s right. As a parent and member of this community, I ask you to reconsider.
Elected officials take oath
Vote — yours is important. Soon you will be voting for someone campaigning to become a public servant.
Before taking office, those elected will take an oath as mandated in the Constitution of Oregon, Article XV, Section 3:
“Section 3. Oaths of office. Every person elected or appointed to any office under this Constitution, shall, before entering on the duties thereof, take an oath or affirmation to support the Constitution of the United States, and of this State, and also an oath of office.”
Before voting, ask yourself, has the candidate campaigned to uphold the laws, or has the candidate avoided mentioning this?
Don’t we want to ‘Shop Local’?
With total outrage, I read the News-Register article reporting the exclusion of Washington Roofing from the pool of contractors authorized to even bid on future school district roofing projects. What has happened to the “Shop and Buy Local” slogan?
Washington Roofing is a local, highly respected, experienced, high quality business offering the best quality materials and finest workmanship within the industry. Washington Roofing stands behind every job.
Washington Roofing’s owners are an extremely valuable part of our community. They support the local economy with property taxes, employing many local people with families, paying living wages and keeping those monies local.
They have, over the years, unselfishly made uncountable, huge donations to local public and private organizations and charities, such as Habitat for Humanity, churches and even the school district that has excluded them. They have taken several local derelict properties within our community and transformed them into valuable, taxpaying, people-employing businesses — again, keeping the money local.
With the exception of Stan Primozich, I would boldly say to our local school board members, “Shame on you; look at the big picture!” Please revisit your decision.
Stop spraying of chemtrails
I just read another alert about global warming due to greenhouse gas effects.
Why doesn’t anyone ever point the finger at those responsible for spraying chemtrails all over the planet? I’m talking about chemtrails that linger all day and turn into clouds; they don’t dissipate in a few minutes like contrails.
Don’t these clouds trap the gases? I wonder what the ingredients are and whether they are making global warming worse.
The Geo Engineering Watch website claims that global weather patterns are being deliberately changed and shows video of chemtrails at www.geoengineeringwatch.org.
We common folks can’t be held responsible for this. Whoever has the power to stop this spraying should exercise that power … please. The sooner, the better.
Do homework on school roofs
Technically, a Roseburg consultant, not McMinnville School Board, wrote specs disqualifying Washington Roofing from bidding on District 40 roof work. But someone must have known the consultant would favor only BUR roofing.
I’m OK with District 40 choosing “new/modified” BUR roofing, but only if it takes an honest look at the Duro-Last material considered superior by Washington Roofing. Since the consultant appears tied at the hip to the fraternity of BUR manufacturers and installers, I encourage school board members to do their research before Monday’s meeting.
The website, www.duro-last.com, has lots of information. I’m sure Eric Wolff or a Duro-Last rep could provide school district references. For an honest durability comparison, please research the durability and repair history Mac school district has had with BUR roofs in the past 25 years.
I’ve never voted against a school bond in 40-plus years, but I don’t like the idea of playing out-of-town favorites. District 40 will need as many “yes” votes as it can muster to pass a bond in today’s economy, and this issue could make a negative difference.
I encourage the school board to allow Washington Roofing to prove its case for the quality/durability of their Duro-Last product, and I have to admit to a personal bias.
After a commercial building I own needed a third BUR roof in 15 years, I let Washington Roofing talk me into replacing it with Duro-Last. That was nine trouble-free years ago, and I’m confident it will last another 10 years. One huge advantage we’ve found with Duro-Last versus BUR material is in patching roof perforations after damage or installing new equipment. It’s a continual problem with past BUR roofs, but no leaks in nine years with Duro-Last.
Don’t take my word for it. Do your own homework, and consider a change of specifications.