Policy Recommendations:
As stated previously in this Blog, the two “urban” issues that I planned to cover this semester was urban/suburban planning, its effects on inner-city residents, and how legislation and public policies have a negative effect on “socially excluded groups” such as the poor and individuals of minority status.
The first government policy concerns the use of “eminent domain” to seize private property for “public use”. Initially this provision under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution required any use of eminent domain to be strictly for the public good. For example, a railroad station, hospital, or a school. However, in 1954 in Berman vs. Parker the Supreme Court ruled in favor of a private concern to build a department store on privately owned property and this precedent setting case opened the door to the use of eminent domain for private instead of public concerns. Most recently in a highly publicized case, the Supreme Court of Connecticut (2005) ruled in favor of a private concern to create a so-called “economic redevelopment project” and this further eroded the definition of “public use”.
The problem for many urban areas with this type of “eminent domain” usage is that low-income, minority residents are the ones who are typically displaced in favor of corporations or wealthy individuals. As we have seen over and over again this semester, many inner-city neighborhoods do not have the social, economic, or the political power needed to compete with major corporations to protect their civil rights.
In my opinion, it would be perfectly acceptable if “eminent domain” was used to create living-wage employment opportunities for these residents but this is not typically the case. For example, creating another Wal-Mart will not provide the type of jobs that can lift an urban neighborhood out of poverty. It will benefit a few upper management people who probably will not reside within the inner-city.
Another type of policy that tends to have negative consequences for urban residents is “recapitalization.” The theory is that by reducing taxes on corporations and decreasing government regulations on businesses that more employment opportunities in the private sector will occur. However, this lowering of corporate taxes and regulations has had just the opposite affect for many inner-cities. As more American based industries and corporations move to other countries in search of slave-waged labor and lower construction costs, this de-regulation of American businesses has only exacerbated the plight of many urban areas. N.A.F.T.A. (North American Free Trade Alliance) alone cost this country several million industrial living-waged jobs. As for lowering or doing away with corporate taxes in order to attract these business to move to your city this policy has also had a negative impact on urban areas. Many corporations when moving to a new area bring with them most of their upper management and high-waged laborers. Typically, the initial construction and service oriented employment are the only benefits to a local community. Without the tax revenues to support the urban infrastructure (roads, schools, hospitals, etc.) these corporations actually use more local services without providing needed financial resources to maintain them. In addition many corporations leave one city for another when their tax breaks expire.
With these types of public policies obviously of little help in solving the rampant poverty, homelessness, and loss of middle-class employment opportunities in many urban areas, I find that the creation of “Community Development Corporations” as a viable alternative (pg. 280).
With the goal of this type of corporate entity to provide employment, services, and reinvestment within the local community they seem to offer the greatest hope in alleviating inner-city poverty. In my opinion, most privately owned corporations have little concern for developing and maintain urban infrastructures. Profit is the main concern for these entities.
A community based organization will have the best interests of the local community as its primary function. If corporate management and their families actually live in the urban area where their businesses are located and not in some far off suburbia, they will have a personal stake in the growth and development of these areas. By investing in local residents and developing their economic, social, and cultural capital this type of community based concern seem to offer the best chance of overcoming the severe poverty that is associated with many inner-cities throughout America.
Final Comment: I was unaware of the existence of Community Based Corporations until our readings this semester. After my pursuit for higher learning and my quest for a college degree are accomplished, I will either actively search for or look into creating such an organization. It is obvious that our government is not going to solve the problems that we face here in America. Both parties talk a lot about solving social issues but little in the way of actual results comes from their bantering. I guess the bottom line is that if you want something done, you better do it yourself! Have a great summer!
Sincerely as always, Mark
Sunday, May 6, 2007
Saturday, April 28, 2007
Summary of News Events this Week by Mark Young
Most Recommended Stories
Sat. April 28, 2007
1. Gasoline-cost analysis omitted major aspect
2. Supreme Court votes against women's rights
3. Better policing is more effective than prison
4. Remark blurs the truth about Arab nations
To access these articles please use the Statesmanjournal "link" provided in the "Link's" section of this Blog.
Annexation Bill (HB3303) would give local residents the right to vote on any possible annexation of property by the city of Salem. The thing that I found interesting about this article was that as Salem expands its “urban boundaries”, residents that live in these so-called “islands” will not have the right to vote on these proposals under current state law. This is another example of how public policies for urban development and transition can overshadow an individual’s rights. As we have seen throughout this semester wherever urban to suburban migration occurs both regions usually suffer. The urban areas lose tax revenues needed to maintain their infrastructure (usually to the detriment of the poor) and the suburbs become the victim of “urban sprawl” as these areas become more congested.
The second article on “Sub Prime Home Lenders” offered something to which I was not aware of concerning this issue. The people who provide these services often work on a “commission” basis. Since they have no real stake (as a loan officer at a bank would) in whether or not these loans ever get paid off, they can collect their commission check and move on the next victim. I use the term “victim” here because these unethical individuals have preyed on people who cannot typically acquire the average home loan from most lending institutions. When the “victims” mortgage payment increases (under this type of loan) to the point where they can no longer make the monthly payment they will lose their home. Since the purchase of a home is usually the biggest investment and the greatest source of most people’s tangible wealth, I am glad to see that the Oregon legislature is trying to make these lenders more accountable and transparent. I hope that more states will address this growing concern also.
Mark
Sat. April 28, 2007
1. Gasoline-cost analysis omitted major aspect
2. Supreme Court votes against women's rights
3. Better policing is more effective than prison
4. Remark blurs the truth about Arab nations
To access these articles please use the Statesmanjournal "link" provided in the "Link's" section of this Blog.
Annexation Bill (HB3303) would give local residents the right to vote on any possible annexation of property by the city of Salem. The thing that I found interesting about this article was that as Salem expands its “urban boundaries”, residents that live in these so-called “islands” will not have the right to vote on these proposals under current state law. This is another example of how public policies for urban development and transition can overshadow an individual’s rights. As we have seen throughout this semester wherever urban to suburban migration occurs both regions usually suffer. The urban areas lose tax revenues needed to maintain their infrastructure (usually to the detriment of the poor) and the suburbs become the victim of “urban sprawl” as these areas become more congested.
The second article on “Sub Prime Home Lenders” offered something to which I was not aware of concerning this issue. The people who provide these services often work on a “commission” basis. Since they have no real stake (as a loan officer at a bank would) in whether or not these loans ever get paid off, they can collect their commission check and move on the next victim. I use the term “victim” here because these unethical individuals have preyed on people who cannot typically acquire the average home loan from most lending institutions. When the “victims” mortgage payment increases (under this type of loan) to the point where they can no longer make the monthly payment they will lose their home. Since the purchase of a home is usually the biggest investment and the greatest source of most people’s tangible wealth, I am glad to see that the Oregon legislature is trying to make these lenders more accountable and transparent. I hope that more states will address this growing concern also.
Mark
Annexation Bill Would Give County Residents a Voice
STEVE LAW
Statesman Journal
April 27, 2007
Ron Taylor, who lives near Joe's on Lancaster Drive NE, wants the right to vote before Salem annexes his neighborhood into the city.
On Thursday, Taylor got what he wanted.
The House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee voted unanimously to approve House Bill 3303, a bill sought by Rep. Brian Clem, D-Salem, on behalf of thousands of people who live east of Lancaster Drive. The bill gives residents in so-called "islands" the right to vote on proposed annexations, in cities that require voter approval of annexations.
The city of Salem has no imminent plans for large-scale annexations of unincorporated areas of East Salem.
"What he's trying to do is give us a voice," Taylor said of Clem's bill.
Taylor said he fears that Salem will try to acquire Cordon Road from Marion County, thus surrounding unincorporated territory with city lands. That creates an island of unincorporated territory inside the city. Islands are easier to annex under state law, and residents of the islands don't get to vote on proposed annexations.
Under HB 3303, people inside the city and the affected islands get to cast votes on proposed annexations.
Taylor worries that his property taxes will increase if Salem annexes his neighborhood, and he's content with services provided by the county and special districts.
"There isn't a single service the city has to offer me," he said.
Clem said forced annexation was a common fear of East Salem residents when he walked door-to-door in last year's campaign.
"They want to be able to vote," Clem said.
Salem City Manager Bob Wells said the city can't simply acquire Cordon Road to surround an island of unincorporated territory. That's because the city's urban growth boundary was deliberately drawn west of Cordon Road, to prevent that kind of tactic, he said.
However, the urban growth boundary, which includes unincorporated East Salem, is a reflection of the area where Salem intends to expand, Wells said.
"How long that takes, I don't know," he said.
The Salem City Council supported HB 3303, Wells said.
Statesman Journal
April 27, 2007
Ron Taylor, who lives near Joe's on Lancaster Drive NE, wants the right to vote before Salem annexes his neighborhood into the city.
On Thursday, Taylor got what he wanted.
The House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee voted unanimously to approve House Bill 3303, a bill sought by Rep. Brian Clem, D-Salem, on behalf of thousands of people who live east of Lancaster Drive. The bill gives residents in so-called "islands" the right to vote on proposed annexations, in cities that require voter approval of annexations.
The city of Salem has no imminent plans for large-scale annexations of unincorporated areas of East Salem.
"What he's trying to do is give us a voice," Taylor said of Clem's bill.
Taylor said he fears that Salem will try to acquire Cordon Road from Marion County, thus surrounding unincorporated territory with city lands. That creates an island of unincorporated territory inside the city. Islands are easier to annex under state law, and residents of the islands don't get to vote on proposed annexations.
Under HB 3303, people inside the city and the affected islands get to cast votes on proposed annexations.
Taylor worries that his property taxes will increase if Salem annexes his neighborhood, and he's content with services provided by the county and special districts.
"There isn't a single service the city has to offer me," he said.
Clem said forced annexation was a common fear of East Salem residents when he walked door-to-door in last year's campaign.
"They want to be able to vote," Clem said.
Salem City Manager Bob Wells said the city can't simply acquire Cordon Road to surround an island of unincorporated territory. That's because the city's urban growth boundary was deliberately drawn west of Cordon Road, to prevent that kind of tactic, he said.
However, the urban growth boundary, which includes unincorporated East Salem, is a reflection of the area where Salem intends to expand, Wells said.
"How long that takes, I don't know," he said.
The Salem City Council supported HB 3303, Wells said.
Legislators Consider More Oversight of Subprime Home Lenders
BY AARON CLARK
The Associated Press
April 26, 2007
Lawmakers are considering clamping down on subprime lenders who they say are trapping Oregon residents into making poor financial decisions that can keep them debt-ridden for years or force them into bankruptcy.
Regulators and industry representatives told members of the Business, Transportation and Workplace Development Committee on Wednesday that several bills under consideration would create more transparency for borrowers and promote long-term stability for the mortgage industry.
"The ability to buy and finance a home is critically important; it may be the single most important financial decision an Oregonian ever makes," said Cory Streisinger, the director of the state's Consumer and Business Services department. "Having good information and having lenders take some responsibility to make sure that the loan is suitable for that person -- that is very important."
Streisinger said many companies that issue subprime loans -- mortgages with high interest rates and fees, generally offered to high-risk borrowers -- have no incentive to ensure that borrowers can pay back the loan over the long term because they are paid on commission.
Regulators and consumer advocates said they want to stem loans in which a lender refinances an existing home loan but the borrower receives no net benefit. Moreover, they said that any legislation should ensure that lenders and brokers demonstrate a borrower's ability to pay back the loan.
Another practice that Streisinger identified as harmful to consumers is negative amortization, when lenders offer mortgage loans with such low payments that the principle balance of the loan increases over time.
Prohibitive fees also can trap unsuspecting borrowers.
Oregon is one of 22 states that has introduced legislation this year aimed at curbing subprime lending practices, which many economists say threaten to hurt the economy.
In recent months, high-risk mortgage lending practices have resulted in shocks in the housing market as dozens of mortgage companies have gone under and many others have laid off workers.
Although Wall Street has expressed concern that the blowup of companies that make higher-risk loans could spill into other industries, Treasury Department officials have said the current situation is manageable.
The crisis has been less pronounced in Oregon, where housing and land prices have continued to rise, albeit more slowly, protecting borrowers who took out subprime loans.
Fifteen percent of outstanding loans nationally, including those made decades ago, are subprime, but the comparable figure for Portland is 9.8 percent, according to First American LoanPerformance data from 2006.
In 2006, subprime loans accounted for 17 percent of new mortgages in Oregon, down from the 20 percent in each of the previous two years, according to the organization.
The Associated Press
April 26, 2007
Lawmakers are considering clamping down on subprime lenders who they say are trapping Oregon residents into making poor financial decisions that can keep them debt-ridden for years or force them into bankruptcy.
Regulators and industry representatives told members of the Business, Transportation and Workplace Development Committee on Wednesday that several bills under consideration would create more transparency for borrowers and promote long-term stability for the mortgage industry.
"The ability to buy and finance a home is critically important; it may be the single most important financial decision an Oregonian ever makes," said Cory Streisinger, the director of the state's Consumer and Business Services department. "Having good information and having lenders take some responsibility to make sure that the loan is suitable for that person -- that is very important."
Streisinger said many companies that issue subprime loans -- mortgages with high interest rates and fees, generally offered to high-risk borrowers -- have no incentive to ensure that borrowers can pay back the loan over the long term because they are paid on commission.
Regulators and consumer advocates said they want to stem loans in which a lender refinances an existing home loan but the borrower receives no net benefit. Moreover, they said that any legislation should ensure that lenders and brokers demonstrate a borrower's ability to pay back the loan.
Another practice that Streisinger identified as harmful to consumers is negative amortization, when lenders offer mortgage loans with such low payments that the principle balance of the loan increases over time.
Prohibitive fees also can trap unsuspecting borrowers.
Oregon is one of 22 states that has introduced legislation this year aimed at curbing subprime lending practices, which many economists say threaten to hurt the economy.
In recent months, high-risk mortgage lending practices have resulted in shocks in the housing market as dozens of mortgage companies have gone under and many others have laid off workers.
Although Wall Street has expressed concern that the blowup of companies that make higher-risk loans could spill into other industries, Treasury Department officials have said the current situation is manageable.
The crisis has been less pronounced in Oregon, where housing and land prices have continued to rise, albeit more slowly, protecting borrowers who took out subprime loans.
Fifteen percent of outstanding loans nationally, including those made decades ago, are subprime, but the comparable figure for Portland is 9.8 percent, according to First American LoanPerformance data from 2006.
In 2006, subprime loans accounted for 17 percent of new mortgages in Oregon, down from the 20 percent in each of the previous two years, according to the organization.
Voters Might Get Opportunity to Retool Measure 37
BY AARON CLARK
The Associated Press
April 28, 2007
Oregon lawmakers advanced a bill Thursday that would give voters a shot at amending the state's controversial property rights law.
Voters would choose between a measure that would curb large-scale development but allow an expedited process for property owners who want to build no more than three homes and the existing process in which most counties and the state have ceded development rights under the property rights law known as Measure 37.
A party-line vote in the Joint Committee on Land Use Fairness broke a nearly four-month stalemate during which the panel heard testimony from hundreds of people and held more than a dozen public meetings in an attempt to fix the voter-passed initiative.
Lawmakers said House Bill 3540 would allow voters to decide what they meant in 2004, when they passed the measure that requires governments to pay owners for property value lost from land-use restrictions passed after the property was purchased.
If governments don't pay -- and Measure 37 claims against state and local governments already have reached more than $10 billion -- they must waive the restriction and allow development.
"A lot of people wanted a right to develop their property and we still have that in this document," said Sen. Kurt Schrader, D-Canby, a member of the committee.
Republicans who voted against the legislation said it guts the voter passed land-use law. They predicted that if the bill is sent to voters, it would be rejected in favor of the current method of processing and approving claims.
"The only conclusion I have is that the effort behind this is to repeal ballot Measure 37," said Sen. Larry George, R-Sherwood.
Supporters of the bill said the current system offers no recourse for neighbors who might be effected by large-scale development adjacent to their property.
The bill would allow landowners who want to build up to three homes to qualify for an "express lane" -- putting their Measure 37 claims on a fast track. Supporters of the bill estimate that more than two-thirds of the roughly 7,000 existing claims could fall into this category.
Property owners who think they lost more than the value of three home sites because of property regulations enacted after their land purchase would be allowed to apply to build as many as 10 homes -- with a statewide maximum of 20 home sites per claimant -- but would have to go through a more rigorous valuation process to prove their loss.
This option would not be available for some properties that are entirely high-value farm land, or in areas where groundwater is limited or in critical supply.
The Associated Press
April 28, 2007
Oregon lawmakers advanced a bill Thursday that would give voters a shot at amending the state's controversial property rights law.
Voters would choose between a measure that would curb large-scale development but allow an expedited process for property owners who want to build no more than three homes and the existing process in which most counties and the state have ceded development rights under the property rights law known as Measure 37.
A party-line vote in the Joint Committee on Land Use Fairness broke a nearly four-month stalemate during which the panel heard testimony from hundreds of people and held more than a dozen public meetings in an attempt to fix the voter-passed initiative.
Lawmakers said House Bill 3540 would allow voters to decide what they meant in 2004, when they passed the measure that requires governments to pay owners for property value lost from land-use restrictions passed after the property was purchased.
If governments don't pay -- and Measure 37 claims against state and local governments already have reached more than $10 billion -- they must waive the restriction and allow development.
"A lot of people wanted a right to develop their property and we still have that in this document," said Sen. Kurt Schrader, D-Canby, a member of the committee.
Republicans who voted against the legislation said it guts the voter passed land-use law. They predicted that if the bill is sent to voters, it would be rejected in favor of the current method of processing and approving claims.
"The only conclusion I have is that the effort behind this is to repeal ballot Measure 37," said Sen. Larry George, R-Sherwood.
Supporters of the bill said the current system offers no recourse for neighbors who might be effected by large-scale development adjacent to their property.
The bill would allow landowners who want to build up to three homes to qualify for an "express lane" -- putting their Measure 37 claims on a fast track. Supporters of the bill estimate that more than two-thirds of the roughly 7,000 existing claims could fall into this category.
Property owners who think they lost more than the value of three home sites because of property regulations enacted after their land purchase would be allowed to apply to build as many as 10 homes -- with a statewide maximum of 20 home sites per claimant -- but would have to go through a more rigorous valuation process to prove their loss.
This option would not be available for some properties that are entirely high-value farm land, or in areas where groundwater is limited or in critical supply.
Affordable-Housing Bill Introduced in Second Legislative Chamber
STEVE LAW
Statesman Journal
April 24, 2007
Rep. Deborah Boone, D-Cannon Beach, and four other lawmakers have introduced a House bill to raise fees on recording of real-estate documents, to finance affordable-housing projects.
As reported in the Statesman Journal, a similar Senate proposal, Senate Bill 38, was deemed by legislative lawyers to be a tax. Tax-raising bills must originate in the House.
Boone’s proposal helps keep the affordable-housing proposal alive.
Sen. Margaret Carter, D-Portland, worked with Boone to submit a House version of the bill. Other co-sponsors are Rep. Mary Nolan, D-Portland, the powerful co-chairwoman of the joint budget committee; Sen. Ryan Deckert, D-Beaverton, whose committee has already worked the bill in the Senate, and Rep. Paul Holvey, D-Eugene.
Statesman Journal
April 24, 2007
Rep. Deborah Boone, D-Cannon Beach, and four other lawmakers have introduced a House bill to raise fees on recording of real-estate documents, to finance affordable-housing projects.
As reported in the Statesman Journal, a similar Senate proposal, Senate Bill 38, was deemed by legislative lawyers to be a tax. Tax-raising bills must originate in the House.
Boone’s proposal helps keep the affordable-housing proposal alive.
Sen. Margaret Carter, D-Portland, worked with Boone to submit a House version of the bill. Other co-sponsors are Rep. Mary Nolan, D-Portland, the powerful co-chairwoman of the joint budget committee; Sen. Ryan Deckert, D-Beaverton, whose committee has already worked the bill in the Senate, and Rep. Paul Holvey, D-Eugene.
Saturday, April 21, 2007
Summary of News Events this Week by Mark Young
Most Recommended Stories
Sat. April 21, 2007
1. Avoid making dumb comments to troops' families
2. Explore the future of 'green' living in Salem
3. Students learn about the Earth by teaching
4. 'Guns were yesterday's news, yesterday's worry, yesterday's political cause'
5. Logic behind staying in Iraq doesn't make sense
To read these "Most Recommended Stories" please use the Statesman Journal web-site link provided in the "Link's" section of this blog.
The article on the "Gay Rights" anti discrimination bill awaiting the Governors signature is another example of a minority groups exclusion from our society and its attempt to rectify the situation. In my opinion, no one in America should be exempt from employment opportunities based on their race, ethnicity, or sexual preference. This bill helps to amend some of these employment concerns. However, one rather troubling issue that this bill addresses, is that certain religious organizations are exempt from this legislation. I fully understand that some forms of Christianity perceive homo-sexuality as an abomination, but one would think that a religion which is based on the teachings of Christ would be more tolerant of others. Having studied the bible as a once practicing Catholic and later a born-again christian, the understanding that I took from Christ's teachings was acceptance and love for one's fellow human beings regardless of who or what they are. It is sad that practicing Christians cannot find a place in their hearts and institutions for anyone in need of employment.
As to the "Measure 37" debate over property development in Oregon, this issue continues to "heat up". The concerns over protecting farmlands and forests versus the rights of real estate developers to build home sites on land which they own, will only increase in the months ahead. In my opinion, it will be the faction which possesses the most "political clout" with Oregon's legislators that will ultimately prevail.
Note: The posting on the use of "eminent domain" here in Oregon, which I commented on earlier this semester, has received no new coverage as of this date. I was hoping to make this issue more of a centerpiece for this blog but I have seen nothing lately on this subject. Have a great day.
Sincerely, Mark
Sat. April 21, 2007
1. Avoid making dumb comments to troops' families
2. Explore the future of 'green' living in Salem
3. Students learn about the Earth by teaching
4. 'Guns were yesterday's news, yesterday's worry, yesterday's political cause'
5. Logic behind staying in Iraq doesn't make sense
To read these "Most Recommended Stories" please use the Statesman Journal web-site link provided in the "Link's" section of this blog.
The article on the "Gay Rights" anti discrimination bill awaiting the Governors signature is another example of a minority groups exclusion from our society and its attempt to rectify the situation. In my opinion, no one in America should be exempt from employment opportunities based on their race, ethnicity, or sexual preference. This bill helps to amend some of these employment concerns. However, one rather troubling issue that this bill addresses, is that certain religious organizations are exempt from this legislation. I fully understand that some forms of Christianity perceive homo-sexuality as an abomination, but one would think that a religion which is based on the teachings of Christ would be more tolerant of others. Having studied the bible as a once practicing Catholic and later a born-again christian, the understanding that I took from Christ's teachings was acceptance and love for one's fellow human beings regardless of who or what they are. It is sad that practicing Christians cannot find a place in their hearts and institutions for anyone in need of employment.
As to the "Measure 37" debate over property development in Oregon, this issue continues to "heat up". The concerns over protecting farmlands and forests versus the rights of real estate developers to build home sites on land which they own, will only increase in the months ahead. In my opinion, it will be the faction which possesses the most "political clout" with Oregon's legislators that will ultimately prevail.
Note: The posting on the use of "eminent domain" here in Oregon, which I commented on earlier this semester, has received no new coverage as of this date. I was hoping to make this issue more of a centerpiece for this blog but I have seen nothing lately on this subject. Have a great day.
Sincerely, Mark
Gay-Rights Bill Awaits Governor's Signature
April 20, 2007
BY PETER WONG
A gay-rights bill awaits only Gov. Ted Kulongoski's signature to become law.
The Oregon Senate, by a 19-7 vote Thursday, gave final approval to a bill that bars discrimination based on sexual orientation. Similar bills have been introduced since 1973.
Kulongoski has said he will sign the bill.
The House approved Senate Bill 2 on Tuesday after amending it to make the exemption for religious organizations more specific. Commercial-type ventures, such as hospitals, still would be subject to Oregon's anti-discrimination law, but other activities "closely connected" with organizations would not.
"It was changed to address some of the concerns of religious organizations that wanted more specificity in this exemption, and they got it," said Sen. Ginny Burdick, D-Portland, the bill's floor manager.
All seven votes against the bill came from Republicans.
"It clearly illustrates the danger of a potentially unconstitutional restriction of free speech inherent in this bill," said Sen. Doug Whitsett, R-Klamath Falls.
Opponents have not said whether they will mount a challenge to the law in court, or petition to refer it or a pending domestic-partnerships bill to voters. Either referral would require 55,179 voter signatures to be filed within 90 days after the 2007 Legislature adjourns, and would be placed on the November 2008 ballot.
House Bill 2007, which establishes domestic partnerships for same-sex couples that cannot marry, awaits a Senate committee hearing and chamber vote. The Senate passed a similar bill in 2005, coupled with anti-discrimination provisions, but it died in the House.
pwong@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 39
BY PETER WONG
A gay-rights bill awaits only Gov. Ted Kulongoski's signature to become law.
The Oregon Senate, by a 19-7 vote Thursday, gave final approval to a bill that bars discrimination based on sexual orientation. Similar bills have been introduced since 1973.
Kulongoski has said he will sign the bill.
The House approved Senate Bill 2 on Tuesday after amending it to make the exemption for religious organizations more specific. Commercial-type ventures, such as hospitals, still would be subject to Oregon's anti-discrimination law, but other activities "closely connected" with organizations would not.
"It was changed to address some of the concerns of religious organizations that wanted more specificity in this exemption, and they got it," said Sen. Ginny Burdick, D-Portland, the bill's floor manager.
All seven votes against the bill came from Republicans.
"It clearly illustrates the danger of a potentially unconstitutional restriction of free speech inherent in this bill," said Sen. Doug Whitsett, R-Klamath Falls.
Opponents have not said whether they will mount a challenge to the law in court, or petition to refer it or a pending domestic-partnerships bill to voters. Either referral would require 55,179 voter signatures to be filed within 90 days after the 2007 Legislature adjourns, and would be placed on the November 2008 ballot.
House Bill 2007, which establishes domestic partnerships for same-sex couples that cannot marry, awaits a Senate committee hearing and chamber vote. The Senate passed a similar bill in 2005, coupled with anti-discrimination provisions, but it died in the House.
pwong@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 39
Hearing Revisits Debate on Land Use
PETER WONG
Statesman Journal
April 18, 2007
No one was neutral Tuesday night about the property-compensation measure that voters approved in 2004 as Measure 37, or about specific changes that lawmakers considered at a three-hour hearing.
Many of the participants and observers who filled seats in six Capitol hearing rooms wore just one of two stickers: "Fix 37," or "I love M 37" with a heart substituting for "love." More than 100 signed up to testify, although less than half did.
Measure 37 requires government either to pay landowners when regulations result in reduced property values or to waive the regulations and allow development. About 7,000 claims have been filed, many of them within weeks of a Dec. 4, 2006, deadline set in the measure.
Members of the Legislature's Joint Committee on Land Use Fairness heard proposed changes that would allow some landowners to proceed with development of homes. But the changes also would limit the scope of development, particularly on Oregon's best farmland or areas with limited groundwater.
"It strikes a responsible balance between landowner rights and farmland protection," said Gary Conkling, who spoke for the Oregon Winegrowers Association.
Ken Maddox, a Hood River grower, reflected the view of many who suggested that the proposed changes might allow too much development near farms and forests. Measure 37 claimants could develop up to three home sites with a guarantee of at least one home.
"I'd suggest a more conservative approach," he said.
But others vigorously disagreed.
"I believe these bills were created to destroy Measure 37," said Rita Swyers of Hood River, who ran twice for the Legislature in the 1980s.
Sixty-one percent of residents who voted approved Measure 37 in 2004.
"I hope you will listen to the will of the voters and uphold what their clear message was," said David Jaques of Winston, a real estate broker and chairman of the Douglas County Planning Commission.
The Legislature's minority Republicans have said that they do not agree with the changes, and Senate Republicans were not part of the five-member work group that came up with the changes behind the scenes.
pwong@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 399-6745
Statesman Journal
April 18, 2007
No one was neutral Tuesday night about the property-compensation measure that voters approved in 2004 as Measure 37, or about specific changes that lawmakers considered at a three-hour hearing.
Many of the participants and observers who filled seats in six Capitol hearing rooms wore just one of two stickers: "Fix 37," or "I love M 37" with a heart substituting for "love." More than 100 signed up to testify, although less than half did.
Measure 37 requires government either to pay landowners when regulations result in reduced property values or to waive the regulations and allow development. About 7,000 claims have been filed, many of them within weeks of a Dec. 4, 2006, deadline set in the measure.
Members of the Legislature's Joint Committee on Land Use Fairness heard proposed changes that would allow some landowners to proceed with development of homes. But the changes also would limit the scope of development, particularly on Oregon's best farmland or areas with limited groundwater.
"It strikes a responsible balance between landowner rights and farmland protection," said Gary Conkling, who spoke for the Oregon Winegrowers Association.
Ken Maddox, a Hood River grower, reflected the view of many who suggested that the proposed changes might allow too much development near farms and forests. Measure 37 claimants could develop up to three home sites with a guarantee of at least one home.
"I'd suggest a more conservative approach," he said.
But others vigorously disagreed.
"I believe these bills were created to destroy Measure 37," said Rita Swyers of Hood River, who ran twice for the Legislature in the 1980s.
Sixty-one percent of residents who voted approved Measure 37 in 2004.
"I hope you will listen to the will of the voters and uphold what their clear message was," said David Jaques of Winston, a real estate broker and chairman of the Douglas County Planning Commission.
The Legislature's minority Republicans have said that they do not agree with the changes, and Senate Republicans were not part of the five-member work group that came up with the changes behind the scenes.
pwong@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 399-6745
Sunday, April 15, 2007
Summary of News Events this Week by Mark Young
Most Recommended Stories
Sun. April 15, 2007
1. Family Secrets
2. Hiring illegal aliens
3. Officers aid parents in fight against meth
4. Another View: Pedophile's Web site a disturbing reminder
To view these stories or the complete versions of the articles in this weeks post use the "Statesman Journal" link provided in the "links" section of this blog.
The article on "Children of Prison Inmates" was rather disturbing. The fact that an estimated 100,000 of these children statewide have parents who are somehow involved with the criminal justice system is deplorable.
The "invisible population" of children whose parents are incarcerated is another example of how the most vulnerable segment of our society if often neglected. These children have done nothing wrong, but due to their parents actions, their lives are irrevocably altered. Another social factor is how many of them will go on imitate the actions of their parents and end up in jail themselves. Too often children follow in their parents footsteps and without proper guidance fall prey to repeating the only type of behavior that they have ever known. I am not sure if these children fall under the category of a "socially excluded group" or not. However, in many cases thanks to their parents they have become part of a group that may be excluded from many of the opportunities that life has to offer. This is another example of how the actions of one person can affect many others, and often it is the innocent who pay the greatest price!
Sun. April 15, 2007
1. Family Secrets
2. Hiring illegal aliens
3. Officers aid parents in fight against meth
4. Another View: Pedophile's Web site a disturbing reminder
To view these stories or the complete versions of the articles in this weeks post use the "Statesman Journal" link provided in the "links" section of this blog.
The article on "Children of Prison Inmates" was rather disturbing. The fact that an estimated 100,000 of these children statewide have parents who are somehow involved with the criminal justice system is deplorable.
The "invisible population" of children whose parents are incarcerated is another example of how the most vulnerable segment of our society if often neglected. These children have done nothing wrong, but due to their parents actions, their lives are irrevocably altered. Another social factor is how many of them will go on imitate the actions of their parents and end up in jail themselves. Too often children follow in their parents footsteps and without proper guidance fall prey to repeating the only type of behavior that they have ever known. I am not sure if these children fall under the category of a "socially excluded group" or not. However, in many cases thanks to their parents they have become part of a group that may be excluded from many of the opportunities that life has to offer. This is another example of how the actions of one person can affect many others, and often it is the innocent who pay the greatest price!
Children of Prison Inmates ShareTheir Struggles
THELMA GUERRERO
Statesman Journal
April 13, 2007
Sareina Hernandez is angry at her mother for erasing any chance of having a normal mother-daughter relationship while growing up.
"This isn't the first time she's gone to prison," Hernandez, 13, said about her mother, Tiffany Turner, who was imprisoned on drug charges. "She's been there on and off since I was born. I feel sad and angry a lot because she doesn't see what she's doing to me. It's almost like I'm locked up in prison, too."
Hernandez, a seventh-grader at Parrish Middle School in Salem, is one of an estimated 774 youths in Marion County who have a parent in jail or prison.
Statewide, an estimated 100,000 Oregon children have a parent involved in the criminal justice system in some form, whether it's prison, probation, parole, or ordered anger management.
Children of incarcerated parents are an invisible population, said Cheryl Hansen, the executive director of the Children's Justice Alliance.
They often endure a silent sentence of their own, she said.
"People don't know about these children and, in many cases, they don't want to hear about them," Hansen said. "Communities will say, 'We don't have that problem,' but every community in the state of Oregon has the problem.
"It's just very well hidden."
No statewide figures exist on the exact number of children in Oregon whose parents are incarcerated because there is no system in place that asks offenders if they have children.
To complicate matters, many prisoners won't mention their children because they believe they'll be put in foster care, Hansen said.
The Oregon Department of Human Services reports that 71 percent of children enter foster care because of parental drug abuse.
In Marion County, 74 percent of children in foster care were removed from their parents because of drug abuse, according to the Marion County Children of Incarcerated Parents Initiative, a program that offers family support for children with parents involved in the criminal-justice system.
The most basic need, and often the most difficult, is for children to stay in touch with the imprisoned parent, Hansen said.
"These children still love their moms and dads," Hansen said. "They're more stable, do better in school, and the same is true of the parents.
"It gives parents an incentive to find ways to be successful both in prison and when they get out."
tguerrero@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 399-6815
Statesman Journal
April 13, 2007
Sareina Hernandez is angry at her mother for erasing any chance of having a normal mother-daughter relationship while growing up.
"This isn't the first time she's gone to prison," Hernandez, 13, said about her mother, Tiffany Turner, who was imprisoned on drug charges. "She's been there on and off since I was born. I feel sad and angry a lot because she doesn't see what she's doing to me. It's almost like I'm locked up in prison, too."
Hernandez, a seventh-grader at Parrish Middle School in Salem, is one of an estimated 774 youths in Marion County who have a parent in jail or prison.
Statewide, an estimated 100,000 Oregon children have a parent involved in the criminal justice system in some form, whether it's prison, probation, parole, or ordered anger management.
Children of incarcerated parents are an invisible population, said Cheryl Hansen, the executive director of the Children's Justice Alliance.
They often endure a silent sentence of their own, she said.
"People don't know about these children and, in many cases, they don't want to hear about them," Hansen said. "Communities will say, 'We don't have that problem,' but every community in the state of Oregon has the problem.
"It's just very well hidden."
No statewide figures exist on the exact number of children in Oregon whose parents are incarcerated because there is no system in place that asks offenders if they have children.
To complicate matters, many prisoners won't mention their children because they believe they'll be put in foster care, Hansen said.
The Oregon Department of Human Services reports that 71 percent of children enter foster care because of parental drug abuse.
In Marion County, 74 percent of children in foster care were removed from their parents because of drug abuse, according to the Marion County Children of Incarcerated Parents Initiative, a program that offers family support for children with parents involved in the criminal-justice system.
The most basic need, and often the most difficult, is for children to stay in touch with the imprisoned parent, Hansen said.
"These children still love their moms and dads," Hansen said. "They're more stable, do better in school, and the same is true of the parents.
"It gives parents an incentive to find ways to be successful both in prison and when they get out."
tguerrero@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 399-6815
Ruling by LUBA Could Claify Some Land Use Measures
The Associated press.
April 11, 2007
An Oregon board says property owners who use the voter initiative Measure 37 to develop land may need approval from both local and state agencies.
The ruling by the Land Use Board of Appeals is a setback for Willis Lee, 73, who has been trying to divide the 23-acre Ashland property he bought in 1974. He had proposed 5-acre lots, and Jackson County had approved the subdivision.
The decision could clarify some questions about the measure approved in November 2004. Legislators are bargaining over it, too.
Measure 37 requires governments either to pay landowners for the reduced values resulting from land-use regulations or waive the regulations. There are exceptions.
Almost 600 claims representing about 60,000 acres have been filed in Jackson County.
"This is one of the first decisions that has statewide applicability," said Greg Holmes of 1000 Friends of Oregon, a land-use planning advocacy group.
In January, a local judge ruled that Jackson County had erred in not requiring property owners such as Lee to file a separate claim with the state.
"He said we're not allowed to waive state rules and regulations," said Doug McGeary, a lawyer for the county.
So, he said, the county didn't contest the issue before the State Land Use Board of Appeals.
"We conceded," McGeary said.
Commissioner C.W. Smith said the county is informing Measure 37 claimants they may need to file a separate claim with the state, which is interested in reviewing claims involving land zoned for exclusive farm use, for open space reserves, or for forests.
Lee said he will continue to try to divide his property.
Two months ago, he said, after his case went before the state board, he got a waiver from the state.
Now that the case has been settled, he probably will have to file his application with the county again.
He said dealing with the bureaucracy has been an aggravation.
"I lost a lot of sleep in the beginning," he said. "I thought 'I don't want to kill myself over it.'"
Lee plans to talk to county commissioners to find out what steps he'll have to take next.
"It'll work out, or it won't," he said.
April 11, 2007
An Oregon board says property owners who use the voter initiative Measure 37 to develop land may need approval from both local and state agencies.
The ruling by the Land Use Board of Appeals is a setback for Willis Lee, 73, who has been trying to divide the 23-acre Ashland property he bought in 1974. He had proposed 5-acre lots, and Jackson County had approved the subdivision.
The decision could clarify some questions about the measure approved in November 2004. Legislators are bargaining over it, too.
Measure 37 requires governments either to pay landowners for the reduced values resulting from land-use regulations or waive the regulations. There are exceptions.
Almost 600 claims representing about 60,000 acres have been filed in Jackson County.
"This is one of the first decisions that has statewide applicability," said Greg Holmes of 1000 Friends of Oregon, a land-use planning advocacy group.
In January, a local judge ruled that Jackson County had erred in not requiring property owners such as Lee to file a separate claim with the state.
"He said we're not allowed to waive state rules and regulations," said Doug McGeary, a lawyer for the county.
So, he said, the county didn't contest the issue before the State Land Use Board of Appeals.
"We conceded," McGeary said.
Commissioner C.W. Smith said the county is informing Measure 37 claimants they may need to file a separate claim with the state, which is interested in reviewing claims involving land zoned for exclusive farm use, for open space reserves, or for forests.
Lee said he will continue to try to divide his property.
Two months ago, he said, after his case went before the state board, he got a waiver from the state.
Now that the case has been settled, he probably will have to file his application with the county again.
He said dealing with the bureaucracy has been an aggravation.
"I lost a lot of sleep in the beginning," he said. "I thought 'I don't want to kill myself over it.'"
Lee plans to talk to county commissioners to find out what steps he'll have to take next.
"It'll work out, or it won't," he said.
Oregon House to Vote on Gay-Rights Bill
STEVE LAW
Statesman Journal
April 11, 2007
The Oregon House of Representatives will vote for the first time on a bill to grant marriage-style benefits to same-sex couples, and it will vote on a Senate-passed bill that would bar discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.
Both gay-rights bills advanced to the full House Tuesday after the House Elections, Ethics and Rules Committee passed amendments to address critics' concerns.
House Bill 2007 would enable committed same-sex couples to enter into contractual relationships that grant the same benefits offered to married couples under state law. The House committee stripped the term "civil unions" from the bill, preferring to call the relationships "domestic partnerships."
Senate Bill 2 would ban discrimination against gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgendered people in employment, housing and access to public accommodations. The committee amended that bill Tuesday evening, after a day of behind-the-scenes talks, to strengthen the exemption for religious groups.
The revisions make it clear that faith groups, including those not tied to a specific church or denomination, could avoid hiring or serving people based on their sexual orientation. Language also was added to make it clear that religious schools, day-care centers, camps, thrift stores, book stores, radio stations and shelters are exempted.
If both bills are signed into law as expected, voters still might have the final say. Despite the changes made Tuesday, Oregon Family Council, which sponsored the gay-marriage ban on the 2004 ballot, may gather signatures to force a public vote on one or both measures, said spokesman Nick Graham.
Some bill supporters said replacing the term civil unions could help the bill weather an expected ballot-measure fight, based on polling results.
Thatcher said she prefers a "reciprocal beneficiaries" bill proposed by some House Republicans. That would allow a more limited range of marriage-style benefits to two people, such as elderly sisters, who live together and depend on each other.
Several gay-rights advocates have been saying there is no way to assuage Oregon Family Council on this issue and expected that one or both measures would wind up on the ballot via a referendum campaign.
Statesman Journal
April 11, 2007
The Oregon House of Representatives will vote for the first time on a bill to grant marriage-style benefits to same-sex couples, and it will vote on a Senate-passed bill that would bar discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.
Both gay-rights bills advanced to the full House Tuesday after the House Elections, Ethics and Rules Committee passed amendments to address critics' concerns.
House Bill 2007 would enable committed same-sex couples to enter into contractual relationships that grant the same benefits offered to married couples under state law. The House committee stripped the term "civil unions" from the bill, preferring to call the relationships "domestic partnerships."
Senate Bill 2 would ban discrimination against gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgendered people in employment, housing and access to public accommodations. The committee amended that bill Tuesday evening, after a day of behind-the-scenes talks, to strengthen the exemption for religious groups.
The revisions make it clear that faith groups, including those not tied to a specific church or denomination, could avoid hiring or serving people based on their sexual orientation. Language also was added to make it clear that religious schools, day-care centers, camps, thrift stores, book stores, radio stations and shelters are exempted.
If both bills are signed into law as expected, voters still might have the final say. Despite the changes made Tuesday, Oregon Family Council, which sponsored the gay-marriage ban on the 2004 ballot, may gather signatures to force a public vote on one or both measures, said spokesman Nick Graham.
Some bill supporters said replacing the term civil unions could help the bill weather an expected ballot-measure fight, based on polling results.
Thatcher said she prefers a "reciprocal beneficiaries" bill proposed by some House Republicans. That would allow a more limited range of marriage-style benefits to two people, such as elderly sisters, who live together and depend on each other.
Several gay-rights advocates have been saying there is no way to assuage Oregon Family Council on this issue and expected that one or both measures would wind up on the ballot via a referendum campaign.
Health-Care Reform Plan Excludes Medicare
PETER WONG
Statesman Journal
April 10, 2007
Oregon's share of federal Medicare money will be excluded, at least for now, from an effort to reshape Oregon's health-care system and extend coverage to about 600,000 people.
Committee leaders decided against seeking federal permission to include Oregon's share of Medicare, the federal program of health insurance for people age 65 and older, as part of a pooling of several sources of money into an Oregon Health Fund. Including Medicare would require an act of Congress, not just a waiver of rules by a federal agency.
"While Medicare is important, a more important consideration to us is getting a financial reimbursement rate that brings use at least to the national average," Sen. Ben Westlund, D-Tumalo, the committee co-chairman, said in an earlier interview.
Reimbursement rates for Medicare providers in Oregon rank at the bottom of the states.
Westlund said an increase to the national average would produce another $1.5 billion annually on top of the estimated $6 billion spent on health care in Oregon.
The legislation would not actually extend coverage to people without it, at least for a couple of years.
It would set up a seven-member board, which would determine basic benefits for Oregonians, better ways of delivering services, a pool of money to pay for them, and other details. It would maintain a mixed public-private system.
The board's work would be submitted to the 2009 Legislature.
"Health care in Oregon is like two people in a boat rowing in opposite directions, and we're not getting anywhere," said Bates, a physician and the other co-chairman. "We have the opportunity to pull together and get the boat moving forward."
AARP Oregon, formerly the American Association of Retired Persons, raised concerns about including Medicare money in any state pool.
But AARP never said so in testimony on his own proposal, Kitzhaber said, and he has never had a chance to offer amendments that might allay those concerns.
Kitzhaber, also a physician, spoke Monday after a luncheon appearance before the Salem Area Chamber of Commerce.
Omission of Medicare, he said, "would leave a flawed process that excludes a discussion of the very program on which more and more Americans are going to depend on, even as it moves the health-care system toward its final collapse."
Medicare is projected to run out of money by 2018, just a few years after the first of the post-World War II baby boomers start qualifying for coverage.
Kitzhaber was the chief author of the 1989 plan that transformed a traditional Medicaid program into a broader Oregon Health Plan offering basic services to all people under the federal poverty level.
While the priority-setting process for services worked, Kitzhaber said in his speech, the original plan itself was not broad enough to deal with rising costs.
During the speech, which largely focused on the need for change, Kitzhaber gave a personal example of how the system can save money without sacrificing essential services.
He said Medicare would have paid for lab tests and hospital stays for his mother in the final months of her life, when she was suffering from congestive heart failure and other complications. But Annabel Kitzhaber, a former state president of the League of Women Voters, chose to die in her Eugene home in 2005 rather than spend her remaining time in hospitals. She was 88.
"Medicare would not pay $18 an hour for a non-hospice care worker to help her stay in her home," Kitzhaber said. "My point is that the current reimbursement rate of Medicare encourages us to seek acute-care intervention that will not be a cure in these situations."
pwong@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 399-6745
Statesman Journal
April 10, 2007
Oregon's share of federal Medicare money will be excluded, at least for now, from an effort to reshape Oregon's health-care system and extend coverage to about 600,000 people.
Committee leaders decided against seeking federal permission to include Oregon's share of Medicare, the federal program of health insurance for people age 65 and older, as part of a pooling of several sources of money into an Oregon Health Fund. Including Medicare would require an act of Congress, not just a waiver of rules by a federal agency.
"While Medicare is important, a more important consideration to us is getting a financial reimbursement rate that brings use at least to the national average," Sen. Ben Westlund, D-Tumalo, the committee co-chairman, said in an earlier interview.
Reimbursement rates for Medicare providers in Oregon rank at the bottom of the states.
Westlund said an increase to the national average would produce another $1.5 billion annually on top of the estimated $6 billion spent on health care in Oregon.
The legislation would not actually extend coverage to people without it, at least for a couple of years.
It would set up a seven-member board, which would determine basic benefits for Oregonians, better ways of delivering services, a pool of money to pay for them, and other details. It would maintain a mixed public-private system.
The board's work would be submitted to the 2009 Legislature.
"Health care in Oregon is like two people in a boat rowing in opposite directions, and we're not getting anywhere," said Bates, a physician and the other co-chairman. "We have the opportunity to pull together and get the boat moving forward."
AARP Oregon, formerly the American Association of Retired Persons, raised concerns about including Medicare money in any state pool.
But AARP never said so in testimony on his own proposal, Kitzhaber said, and he has never had a chance to offer amendments that might allay those concerns.
Kitzhaber, also a physician, spoke Monday after a luncheon appearance before the Salem Area Chamber of Commerce.
Omission of Medicare, he said, "would leave a flawed process that excludes a discussion of the very program on which more and more Americans are going to depend on, even as it moves the health-care system toward its final collapse."
Medicare is projected to run out of money by 2018, just a few years after the first of the post-World War II baby boomers start qualifying for coverage.
Kitzhaber was the chief author of the 1989 plan that transformed a traditional Medicaid program into a broader Oregon Health Plan offering basic services to all people under the federal poverty level.
While the priority-setting process for services worked, Kitzhaber said in his speech, the original plan itself was not broad enough to deal with rising costs.
During the speech, which largely focused on the need for change, Kitzhaber gave a personal example of how the system can save money without sacrificing essential services.
He said Medicare would have paid for lab tests and hospital stays for his mother in the final months of her life, when she was suffering from congestive heart failure and other complications. But Annabel Kitzhaber, a former state president of the League of Women Voters, chose to die in her Eugene home in 2005 rather than spend her remaining time in hospitals. She was 88.
"Medicare would not pay $18 an hour for a non-hospice care worker to help her stay in her home," Kitzhaber said. "My point is that the current reimbursement rate of Medicare encourages us to seek acute-care intervention that will not be a cure in these situations."
pwong@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 399-6745
Sunday, April 8, 2007
Summary of News Events this Week by Mark Young
Most Recommended Stories
Sun. April 8, 2007
1. Judge acts to deliver aid as well as justice
2. Police chief an asset to Salem
3. Another View: on the 200th anniversary of the abolition of the slave trade
4. Returning military members deserve better
5. Bill would expand time limit on medication lawsuit
6. Meaning of Easter doesn't fit in one basket
To peruse these Most Recommended Stories or the complete version of the articles which I have posted please use the internet link provided in the "Links" section of this blog. Thank you.
With this week’s chapter dealing with “urban displacement”, I thought that the possible home foreclosures of several million Americans to be relevant. I first became aware of “sub prime” lending practices by mortgage companies about six months ago, but very little has been mentioned in the news. You would think that the potential displacement of millions of families across America would be more newsworthy but apparently not.
As the article below states, last year “one in every 92 households” in America was foreclosed on. This number will most certainly increase in the very near future as 20 of the 25 major sub prime lenders in America have closed their doors. One article I read in my research named El Paso as the number one city in America where lenders used this form of mortgaging. These companies took advantage of the lack of knowledge that these working families had in regards to financing. The big winner here will be the banks that foreclose on these property loans. They will benefit not only from any increase in property value but any decrease in what is owed on the property through mortgage payments. This is just another example of how these financial institutions can control the housing market and displace the working class while increasing their profits.
I noticed that Sen. Sherwood of Oregon stated that it’s not the states role to “protect people from being stupid”. While this may be true, it is the state’s role to combat business practices that destroy his constituent’s lives! I hope that voters take notice of his comments and end his political career next election time! The other article on “Measure 37” deals with an issue that I have covered in earlier postings. Eminent domain backing politicians must make sure that just compensation is made by any real estate developers if they force people to move from their property. The rally mentioned in the article is being made to make this point. Too often across America, we have seen the government side with big business against our fellow citizens. These politicians need to be held accountable for their actions. No one should be forced from their land to make way for a new “Wal-Mart”, etc. There is a reason for the amendments to the constitution and this is one of them. The pursuit of happiness directly correlates to obtaining the “American Dream” which usually includes a piece of land. As major corporations continue to increase their stranglehold of power across America, I believe that the slumbering “Silent Majority” may soon wake up to this fact and remain silent no longer.
Well at least I can hope! Sincerely, Mark.
Sun. April 8, 2007
1. Judge acts to deliver aid as well as justice
2. Police chief an asset to Salem
3. Another View: on the 200th anniversary of the abolition of the slave trade
4. Returning military members deserve better
5. Bill would expand time limit on medication lawsuit
6. Meaning of Easter doesn't fit in one basket
To peruse these Most Recommended Stories or the complete version of the articles which I have posted please use the internet link provided in the "Links" section of this blog. Thank you.
With this week’s chapter dealing with “urban displacement”, I thought that the possible home foreclosures of several million Americans to be relevant. I first became aware of “sub prime” lending practices by mortgage companies about six months ago, but very little has been mentioned in the news. You would think that the potential displacement of millions of families across America would be more newsworthy but apparently not.
As the article below states, last year “one in every 92 households” in America was foreclosed on. This number will most certainly increase in the very near future as 20 of the 25 major sub prime lenders in America have closed their doors. One article I read in my research named El Paso as the number one city in America where lenders used this form of mortgaging. These companies took advantage of the lack of knowledge that these working families had in regards to financing. The big winner here will be the banks that foreclose on these property loans. They will benefit not only from any increase in property value but any decrease in what is owed on the property through mortgage payments. This is just another example of how these financial institutions can control the housing market and displace the working class while increasing their profits.
I noticed that Sen. Sherwood of Oregon stated that it’s not the states role to “protect people from being stupid”. While this may be true, it is the state’s role to combat business practices that destroy his constituent’s lives! I hope that voters take notice of his comments and end his political career next election time! The other article on “Measure 37” deals with an issue that I have covered in earlier postings. Eminent domain backing politicians must make sure that just compensation is made by any real estate developers if they force people to move from their property. The rally mentioned in the article is being made to make this point. Too often across America, we have seen the government side with big business against our fellow citizens. These politicians need to be held accountable for their actions. No one should be forced from their land to make way for a new “Wal-Mart”, etc. There is a reason for the amendments to the constitution and this is one of them. The pursuit of happiness directly correlates to obtaining the “American Dream” which usually includes a piece of land. As major corporations continue to increase their stranglehold of power across America, I believe that the slumbering “Silent Majority” may soon wake up to this fact and remain silent no longer.
Well at least I can hope! Sincerely, Mark.
Senate Looks for Ways to Protect Home-Loan Borrowers
STEVE LAW
Statesman Journal
April 5, 2007
Foreclosures among Oregon homeowners increased 40 percent last year. Many blame the rise of "subprime" lenders, who entice buyers who have weak credit and charge them stiff terms.
Now that many subprime lenders are going belly-up and causing jitters on Wall Street, housing advocates decided the time was ripe to seek new consumer protections for would-be customers.
On Wednesday, the Senate Business Committee rolled out Senate Bill 965, which would enact new safeguards for home buyers against so-called "predatory lending."
Sandy Halonen, who runs a low-income housing group in Eugene, said low-income people often are naive about financial matters.
"They can be convinced to take out a mortgage where they really have no money left over to buy food," said Halonen, the executive director of the Neighborhood Economic Development Corp.
Nearly one-third of all Oregon mortgages issued in 2005 required interest-only payments, according to the Oregon Center for Public Policy. Those buyers are banking on rising property values to boost equity in their homes.
Many people are taking out negative-amortization loans, in which their loan principal grows rather than shrinks with each payment.
Senate Bill 965 extends consumer protections for so-called High Cost Home Loans. In today's market, that would be those charging 12 percent to 14 percent interest.
The bill would bar negative-amortization loans and require clear notices about terms of the loans. Borrowers would be steered to financial counselors before taking out loans. The bill is modeled on laws passed in New Mexico and other states.
One out of every 152 Oregon households was slapped with a foreclosure notice last year, Streisinger said, a 40 percent increase from 2005. The national rate was one in every 92 households.
Sen. Larry George, R-Sherwood, panned the bill. "If someone is being deceptive, I'm with you," George said. But it's not the state's role to "protect people from being stupid," he said.
slaw@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 399-6615
Statesman Journal
April 5, 2007
Foreclosures among Oregon homeowners increased 40 percent last year. Many blame the rise of "subprime" lenders, who entice buyers who have weak credit and charge them stiff terms.
Now that many subprime lenders are going belly-up and causing jitters on Wall Street, housing advocates decided the time was ripe to seek new consumer protections for would-be customers.
On Wednesday, the Senate Business Committee rolled out Senate Bill 965, which would enact new safeguards for home buyers against so-called "predatory lending."
Sandy Halonen, who runs a low-income housing group in Eugene, said low-income people often are naive about financial matters.
"They can be convinced to take out a mortgage where they really have no money left over to buy food," said Halonen, the executive director of the Neighborhood Economic Development Corp.
Nearly one-third of all Oregon mortgages issued in 2005 required interest-only payments, according to the Oregon Center for Public Policy. Those buyers are banking on rising property values to boost equity in their homes.
Many people are taking out negative-amortization loans, in which their loan principal grows rather than shrinks with each payment.
Senate Bill 965 extends consumer protections for so-called High Cost Home Loans. In today's market, that would be those charging 12 percent to 14 percent interest.
The bill would bar negative-amortization loans and require clear notices about terms of the loans. Borrowers would be steered to financial counselors before taking out loans. The bill is modeled on laws passed in New Mexico and other states.
One out of every 152 Oregon households was slapped with a foreclosure notice last year, Streisinger said, a 40 percent increase from 2005. The national rate was one in every 92 households.
Sen. Larry George, R-Sherwood, panned the bill. "If someone is being deceptive, I'm with you," George said. But it's not the state's role to "protect people from being stupid," he said.
slaw@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 399-6615
Rally Recognizes Children Who Have Been Abused, Neglected
BY RUTH LIAO
Statesman Journal
April 4, 2007
It took one encounter with a volunteer to help Pamela Butler, who was shuttled around in foster care since she was 7 years old.
Butler, who described members of the state system as overworked and underpaid, was 15 years old when she met a court-appointed special advocate, or CASA.
"I wasn't looking forward to repeating my life story for someone who wouldn't be there for more than two weeks," Butler said. "But I was wrong."
Now a college senior at the University of Oregon, Butler is on track to graduate with degrees in Spanish and business. Butler credited the foster-care support network for her turnaround.
Cordoned off by yellow police tape near the Capitol entrance were 18 baby seats, toddler chairs and rocking chairs. Each represented a child who died as a result of abuse or neglect in Oregon in 2005. In Marion and Polk counties, 1,808 confirmed victims of child abuse were reported in 2005, enough children to fill 32 school buses.
Marion County Circuit Court Judge Pamela Abernethy, who oversees the juvenile services and foster-care system, also spoke at Tuesday's rally.
Nurturing a healthy relationship between a parent and a child is crucial for early childhood development, Abernethy said. She held up her right hand in a fist.
"It's like a hand born without fingers," she said. "The physical architecture of the brain depends on that relationship.
Northeast Salem resident Nancy Boaz held her grandson Jayson during the rally. She said her daughter Melissa receives services through Healthy Start, and encouraged the rest of her family to attend. Boaz said reporting child abuse should be a responsibility for every adult and other children who know or hear about it.
"A lot of kids are neglected and people don't even help," Boaz said.
rliao@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 589-6941
Statesman Journal
April 4, 2007
It took one encounter with a volunteer to help Pamela Butler, who was shuttled around in foster care since she was 7 years old.
Butler, who described members of the state system as overworked and underpaid, was 15 years old when she met a court-appointed special advocate, or CASA.
"I wasn't looking forward to repeating my life story for someone who wouldn't be there for more than two weeks," Butler said. "But I was wrong."
Now a college senior at the University of Oregon, Butler is on track to graduate with degrees in Spanish and business. Butler credited the foster-care support network for her turnaround.
Cordoned off by yellow police tape near the Capitol entrance were 18 baby seats, toddler chairs and rocking chairs. Each represented a child who died as a result of abuse or neglect in Oregon in 2005. In Marion and Polk counties, 1,808 confirmed victims of child abuse were reported in 2005, enough children to fill 32 school buses.
Marion County Circuit Court Judge Pamela Abernethy, who oversees the juvenile services and foster-care system, also spoke at Tuesday's rally.
Nurturing a healthy relationship between a parent and a child is crucial for early childhood development, Abernethy said. She held up her right hand in a fist.
"It's like a hand born without fingers," she said. "The physical architecture of the brain depends on that relationship.
Northeast Salem resident Nancy Boaz held her grandson Jayson during the rally. She said her daughter Melissa receives services through Healthy Start, and encouraged the rest of her family to attend. Boaz said reporting child abuse should be a responsibility for every adult and other children who know or hear about it.
"A lot of kids are neglected and people don't even help," Boaz said.
rliao@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 589-6941
Changes to "Double Majority" Tax-Measure Pass House
The Associated Press
April 6, 2007
Oregonians would get to vote on amending the state's "double majority" requirements for tax measures, under a resolution that passed the House on Thursday on a 46-11 vote and is headed to the Senate.
The double majority was added to the Oregon Constitution in 1996. Measures to raise property taxes need not just a majority vote, but also voter turnout of at least 50 percent of registered voters.
If turnout falls below that threshold, the measure fails.
The proposed fix would eliminate the double majority requirement in elections held in May and November, which backers said would give school districts and local governments two fair shots each year at passing a tax measure on its merits.
House Majority Leader Dave Hunt, D-Gladstone, said the current system concentrates too much power in the hands of nonvoters, who have on occasion campaigned to persuade people not to vote, to tamp down turnout.
"The will of a majority of voters should carry the day," Hunt said.
Backers of the double majority call it a safeguard against allowing a minority of motivated voters to put a financial burden on an entire community. And they say it helps guard against "sneak attack" elections, when cities or school districts put a measure on the ballot with little warning.
Hunt and others said that since the advent of vote by mail, there's no such thing as a low-profile Oregon election.
If the resolution passes, it would be on the ballot in November 2008.
April 6, 2007
Oregonians would get to vote on amending the state's "double majority" requirements for tax measures, under a resolution that passed the House on Thursday on a 46-11 vote and is headed to the Senate.
The double majority was added to the Oregon Constitution in 1996. Measures to raise property taxes need not just a majority vote, but also voter turnout of at least 50 percent of registered voters.
If turnout falls below that threshold, the measure fails.
The proposed fix would eliminate the double majority requirement in elections held in May and November, which backers said would give school districts and local governments two fair shots each year at passing a tax measure on its merits.
House Majority Leader Dave Hunt, D-Gladstone, said the current system concentrates too much power in the hands of nonvoters, who have on occasion campaigned to persuade people not to vote, to tamp down turnout.
"The will of a majority of voters should carry the day," Hunt said.
Backers of the double majority call it a safeguard against allowing a minority of motivated voters to put a financial burden on an entire community. And they say it helps guard against "sneak attack" elections, when cities or school districts put a measure on the ballot with little warning.
Hunt and others said that since the advent of vote by mail, there's no such thing as a low-profile Oregon election.
If the resolution passes, it would be on the ballot in November 2008.
Supporters of "Measure 37" Hold Rally
April 7, 2007
Advocates of change to Oregon's property-compensation law, which voters passed in 2004 as Measure 37, will muster their supporters for a rally.
The rally will be from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. April 14 on the Capitol front steps.
Among the scheduled speakers are Rep. Greg Macpherson, D-Lake Oswego, the co-chairman of the joint legislative committee working on a bill to modify the ballot measure and the son of Hector Macpherson, a state senator from Albany who was the co-author of Oregon's land-use planning law in 1973.
Others include Mike Carrier, the natural-resource policy director for Gov. Ted Kulongoski; state Rep. Brian Clem, D-Salem, a member of the joint committee; Bob Stacey, the executive director of the land-use watchdog 1,000 Friends of Oregon, and several farmers.
Measure 37 requires governments to pay landowners or waive rules when those rules result in reduced property values.
-- Peter Wong
Advocates of change to Oregon's property-compensation law, which voters passed in 2004 as Measure 37, will muster their supporters for a rally.
The rally will be from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. April 14 on the Capitol front steps.
Among the scheduled speakers are Rep. Greg Macpherson, D-Lake Oswego, the co-chairman of the joint legislative committee working on a bill to modify the ballot measure and the son of Hector Macpherson, a state senator from Albany who was the co-author of Oregon's land-use planning law in 1973.
Others include Mike Carrier, the natural-resource policy director for Gov. Ted Kulongoski; state Rep. Brian Clem, D-Salem, a member of the joint committee; Bob Stacey, the executive director of the land-use watchdog 1,000 Friends of Oregon, and several farmers.
Measure 37 requires governments to pay landowners or waive rules when those rules result in reduced property values.
-- Peter Wong
Sunday, April 1, 2007
Summary of News Events this Week by Mark Young
Most Recommended Stories
Sun. April 1, 2007
1.Team works to aid victims of meth abuse
2.Leave schools for blind and deaf independent
3.Community colleges worth the investment
4.Part 1: Saigon and Mui Nei Beach, Vietnam
5.Keep trash from sullying state's natural beauty
6.Hispanic community leaders riled by fight title
To read these articles please click onto the link provided in the "Links" section of this blog.
There are two articles from this week’s news that I would like to comment about. First the article entitled “Americans want to see all illegal immigrants deported.” Obviously the person who wrote this editorial is not familiar with the services that are provided by many of these so called “illegal immigrants” here in the U.S. Not only is it logistically and economically next to impossible to achieve this goal it would create a major problem for many industrial and agricultural businesses. These undocumented workers provide cheap labor in the harvesting of crops and the garment industry to name just a few. This cheap labor, in turn directly reflects of the prices that we pay when we shop. If these people were deported we would see many necessary goods double or triple in cost virtually overnight. While I firmly believe that our boarders need to be protected from individuals crossing who seek to do us harm it should not be at the expense of hardworking immigrants who are only seeking a better way of life for themselves and their families. There needs to be a major immigration policy change that would enable migrant workers to provide these services and return to their country of origin without fear of reprisals. The second article entitled “Salem-based Sunwest faces suit by residents is also very troubling. The care that many of our elderly are receiving in some of these facilities is reprehensible at best. As the baby boomer generation nears retirement age there will be an unprecedented need for elderly care here in the U.S. I understand the need for profit by these businesses but to jeopardize the health and well being of this age cohort is unconscionable. I have worked in geriatrics in the past and the major reason for quitting my job was exactly what this article stated. I was responsible for the care of over 30 residents by myself and it is impossible for one person to provide to services required in an eight hour shift. I was expected to get these people ready for breakfast (bathed, shaved, dressed, etc.) in 45 minutes. Many were ambulatory and able to care for themselves, but the 10 or so that needed one on one care could not be properly attended to in the time frame allotted. Needless to say I did not last long at this facility. If these institutions cannot provide adequate staff now what will happen when the number of residents increases exponentially 20 years from now?
Sun. April 1, 2007
1.Team works to aid victims of meth abuse
2.Leave schools for blind and deaf independent
3.Community colleges worth the investment
4.Part 1: Saigon and Mui Nei Beach, Vietnam
5.Keep trash from sullying state's natural beauty
6.Hispanic community leaders riled by fight title
To read these articles please click onto the link provided in the "Links" section of this blog.
There are two articles from this week’s news that I would like to comment about. First the article entitled “Americans want to see all illegal immigrants deported.” Obviously the person who wrote this editorial is not familiar with the services that are provided by many of these so called “illegal immigrants” here in the U.S. Not only is it logistically and economically next to impossible to achieve this goal it would create a major problem for many industrial and agricultural businesses. These undocumented workers provide cheap labor in the harvesting of crops and the garment industry to name just a few. This cheap labor, in turn directly reflects of the prices that we pay when we shop. If these people were deported we would see many necessary goods double or triple in cost virtually overnight. While I firmly believe that our boarders need to be protected from individuals crossing who seek to do us harm it should not be at the expense of hardworking immigrants who are only seeking a better way of life for themselves and their families. There needs to be a major immigration policy change that would enable migrant workers to provide these services and return to their country of origin without fear of reprisals. The second article entitled “Salem-based Sunwest faces suit by residents is also very troubling. The care that many of our elderly are receiving in some of these facilities is reprehensible at best. As the baby boomer generation nears retirement age there will be an unprecedented need for elderly care here in the U.S. I understand the need for profit by these businesses but to jeopardize the health and well being of this age cohort is unconscionable. I have worked in geriatrics in the past and the major reason for quitting my job was exactly what this article stated. I was responsible for the care of over 30 residents by myself and it is impossible for one person to provide to services required in an eight hour shift. I was expected to get these people ready for breakfast (bathed, shaved, dressed, etc.) in 45 minutes. Many were ambulatory and able to care for themselves, but the 10 or so that needed one on one care could not be properly attended to in the time frame allotted. Needless to say I did not last long at this facility. If these institutions cannot provide adequate staff now what will happen when the number of residents increases exponentially 20 years from now?
Saturday, March 31, 2007
New Housing May Fund Schools
STEVE LAW
Statesman Journal
March 25, 2007
The llamas and filbert trees are gone near West Salem High School, to be replaced by 700 new homes.
Lisa Nair scans those buildable lots in her neighborhood and worries what they portend for her daughter's school. "You see these homes going in, and there's no school being built to provide classrooms for these kids," she said.
Nair and other West Salem parents have one remedy: put a fee on every new home going in.
Salem and other cities and counties across Oregon levy "system development charges" on new homes and other construction to pay for roads, parks, sewers and water systems that serve the new homes. But state law bans local governments from charging development fees for schools, in part because of the lobbying clout of the home-building industry.
In high-growth areas such as West Salem and South Salem, many residents think that's unfair, especially as they see droves of newcomers cause crowding in neighborhood schools.
Senate Bill 366, introduced this session and referred to the Finance and Revenue Committee, would allow school districts to set an impact fee, or system development charge, on new homes or lots. It does not require that fees be set or say how much they would be.
It's crucial to site schools close to where students live, said Heitsch, a co-leader of the school district's Facilities Task Force. More parents can attend teacher conferences. Students can attend after-school activities and devote more time to homework instead of riding buses. The school becomes a stronger center of community life.
Development fees could give school districts the financial means to set aside land, rather than wait for voters to OK a bond measure, Heitsch said.
Senate Bill 366 would require that development fees be spent only to meet the demands of new growth. The money could not be spent merely to replace an aging facility.
Homebuilders and allied industry groups have long opposed school development fees because they raise the price of a new house or cut into their profits.
Salem already charges nearly $12,000 per house for development fees. So far this year, the average West Salem home is selling for $293,550, according to the Willamette Valley Multiple Listing Service. In South Salem, it's $323,339.
Homebuilders are quick to point out that development fees would cover only about 25 percent of the cost of a new school, by some estimates. And some school officials worry that voters will be less prone to support school bond measures if there are school development fees, figuring that those should cover the costs.
Bond measures are the traditional way that school districts pay for new classrooms, but they've gotten much tougher to pass in elections since Oregon voters approved the Measure 47 property tax initiative in 1996.
Eleven other states allow development fees for schools, and eight other states have an alternative mechanism, Hepper said. The group senses that the time is ripe to erase Oregon's ban on school development fees, with so many bond measures going down and Democrats back in control of the Legislature.
Berger said local communities should "step up" and pay for school construction, rather than trying to raise the price of homes by tacking on more development fees. Loosening the double-majority requirement will enable local taxpayers to do more of their share, she said.
Although legislative committees have begun hearings on development fees, the real action is going on behind the scenes in negotiations with homebuilders, Stand for Children and other forces.
Hepper argues that development fees could help the housing industry and parents.
"The benefit for both," he said, "is you buy a house and sell a house in a school district that has good schools."
slaw@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 399-6615
Statesman Journal
March 25, 2007
The llamas and filbert trees are gone near West Salem High School, to be replaced by 700 new homes.
Lisa Nair scans those buildable lots in her neighborhood and worries what they portend for her daughter's school. "You see these homes going in, and there's no school being built to provide classrooms for these kids," she said.
Nair and other West Salem parents have one remedy: put a fee on every new home going in.
Salem and other cities and counties across Oregon levy "system development charges" on new homes and other construction to pay for roads, parks, sewers and water systems that serve the new homes. But state law bans local governments from charging development fees for schools, in part because of the lobbying clout of the home-building industry.
In high-growth areas such as West Salem and South Salem, many residents think that's unfair, especially as they see droves of newcomers cause crowding in neighborhood schools.
Senate Bill 366, introduced this session and referred to the Finance and Revenue Committee, would allow school districts to set an impact fee, or system development charge, on new homes or lots. It does not require that fees be set or say how much they would be.
It's crucial to site schools close to where students live, said Heitsch, a co-leader of the school district's Facilities Task Force. More parents can attend teacher conferences. Students can attend after-school activities and devote more time to homework instead of riding buses. The school becomes a stronger center of community life.
Development fees could give school districts the financial means to set aside land, rather than wait for voters to OK a bond measure, Heitsch said.
Senate Bill 366 would require that development fees be spent only to meet the demands of new growth. The money could not be spent merely to replace an aging facility.
Homebuilders and allied industry groups have long opposed school development fees because they raise the price of a new house or cut into their profits.
Salem already charges nearly $12,000 per house for development fees. So far this year, the average West Salem home is selling for $293,550, according to the Willamette Valley Multiple Listing Service. In South Salem, it's $323,339.
Homebuilders are quick to point out that development fees would cover only about 25 percent of the cost of a new school, by some estimates. And some school officials worry that voters will be less prone to support school bond measures if there are school development fees, figuring that those should cover the costs.
Bond measures are the traditional way that school districts pay for new classrooms, but they've gotten much tougher to pass in elections since Oregon voters approved the Measure 47 property tax initiative in 1996.
Eleven other states allow development fees for schools, and eight other states have an alternative mechanism, Hepper said. The group senses that the time is ripe to erase Oregon's ban on school development fees, with so many bond measures going down and Democrats back in control of the Legislature.
Berger said local communities should "step up" and pay for school construction, rather than trying to raise the price of homes by tacking on more development fees. Loosening the double-majority requirement will enable local taxpayers to do more of their share, she said.
Although legislative committees have begun hearings on development fees, the real action is going on behind the scenes in negotiations with homebuilders, Stand for Children and other forces.
Hepper argues that development fees could help the housing industry and parents.
"The benefit for both," he said, "is you buy a house and sell a house in a school district that has good schools."
slaw@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 399-6615
Americans Want to See All Illegal Immigrants Deported
Editorial Page
March 28, 2007
In your "Winners and Losers" section (March 16), one comment stood out to me. It questions our government's immigration priority, suggesting that we should deport illegal aliens first who are in prison, then move on to people who pose no threat -- defined as those who have no criminal record.
Whoever made this statement is ignorant of our immigration policies. We already consistently deport aliens after they have served their time. Actually we should insist their home country require them to serve out the remainder of their time or bill their country of origin for the cost of incarceration.
Currently, Homeland Security is focusing with interior enforcement on three classes of illegal aliens beyond those not already incarcerated. One, those who have a previous deportation order and have not complied; two, those who are criminal aliens; and three, the most egregious workplace offenders, where whole businesses are given over to criminal activity.
Along the way, Immigration and Customs Enforcement comes across illegal aliens who have no arrest warrant or have committed no other known crime. They still are obligated to apprehend them, and the American people are wanting this done at least until we get control over this problem.
-- Clark T. Seeley, Woodburn
March 28, 2007
In your "Winners and Losers" section (March 16), one comment stood out to me. It questions our government's immigration priority, suggesting that we should deport illegal aliens first who are in prison, then move on to people who pose no threat -- defined as those who have no criminal record.
Whoever made this statement is ignorant of our immigration policies. We already consistently deport aliens after they have served their time. Actually we should insist their home country require them to serve out the remainder of their time or bill their country of origin for the cost of incarceration.
Currently, Homeland Security is focusing with interior enforcement on three classes of illegal aliens beyond those not already incarcerated. One, those who have a previous deportation order and have not complied; two, those who are criminal aliens; and three, the most egregious workplace offenders, where whole businesses are given over to criminal activity.
Along the way, Immigration and Customs Enforcement comes across illegal aliens who have no arrest warrant or have committed no other known crime. They still are obligated to apprehend them, and the American people are wanting this done at least until we get control over this problem.
-- Clark T. Seeley, Woodburn
Salem-Based Sunwest Faces Suit by Residents
MICHAEL ROSE
Statesman Journal
March 29, 2007
Residents of a Sheridan assisted living facility have hauled Sunwest Management Inc. into court, accusing the Salem senior housing manager of charging for services it doesn’t provide.
The litigation threatens Sunwest with a class-action lawsuit, which could potentially have several thousand plaintiffs. Fifty residential facilities in Oregon operated by Sunwest, including those in Keizer, Stayton, Monmouth, and Woodburn, are named in a lawsuit filed in Multnomah County Circuit Court.
At the heart of the dispute: allegations that Sunwest’s standard admission agreement misled residents about the number of staff available to provide daily care, such as help with medication.
Sunwest understaffed assisted living homes and “made a considered decision to promote profit at the expense of their contractual and legal obligations to residents,” according to the lawsuit.
Sunwest issued a statement calling the lawsuit “frivolous and inaccurate.”
The lawsuit demands that Sunwest stop the alleged unlawful trade practices. It seeks an unspecified amount of restitution, attorney fees, and other relief from the court.
The lawsuit needs to be certified as a class action before it advances.
The cost to live in the Sunwest facility starts at about $1,500 a month, the attorney said.
While residents are sometimes encouraged to pay for more services, the facility doesn’t add more or better trained staff to provide additional care, Stebner said.
In court papers, the plaintiffs’ allege staff ratios described in admission agreements counted all staff members “even those who were not employed to or qualified to act as caregivers.”
Sunwest manages retirement, assisted living and memory-care communities. The senior housing owner and operator has about 180 facilities nationwide. Among the many Sunwest facilities named in the lawsuit suit:
In January, Sunwest settled three lawsuits that accused it of ignoring staffing problems at its Meadowlark Assisted Living facility in Yreka, Calif. The California suits alleged staffing issues contributed to residents suffering serious, and sometimes, fatal injuries from falls. Terms prevented attorneys from discussing details of the settlements.
Stebner, the same attorney who filed the recent lawsuit in Oregon, also represented families in the Meadowlark cases.
mrose@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 399-6657
Statesman Journal
March 29, 2007
Residents of a Sheridan assisted living facility have hauled Sunwest Management Inc. into court, accusing the Salem senior housing manager of charging for services it doesn’t provide.
The litigation threatens Sunwest with a class-action lawsuit, which could potentially have several thousand plaintiffs. Fifty residential facilities in Oregon operated by Sunwest, including those in Keizer, Stayton, Monmouth, and Woodburn, are named in a lawsuit filed in Multnomah County Circuit Court.
At the heart of the dispute: allegations that Sunwest’s standard admission agreement misled residents about the number of staff available to provide daily care, such as help with medication.
Sunwest understaffed assisted living homes and “made a considered decision to promote profit at the expense of their contractual and legal obligations to residents,” according to the lawsuit.
Sunwest issued a statement calling the lawsuit “frivolous and inaccurate.”
The lawsuit demands that Sunwest stop the alleged unlawful trade practices. It seeks an unspecified amount of restitution, attorney fees, and other relief from the court.
The lawsuit needs to be certified as a class action before it advances.
The cost to live in the Sunwest facility starts at about $1,500 a month, the attorney said.
While residents are sometimes encouraged to pay for more services, the facility doesn’t add more or better trained staff to provide additional care, Stebner said.
In court papers, the plaintiffs’ allege staff ratios described in admission agreements counted all staff members “even those who were not employed to or qualified to act as caregivers.”
Sunwest manages retirement, assisted living and memory-care communities. The senior housing owner and operator has about 180 facilities nationwide. Among the many Sunwest facilities named in the lawsuit suit:
In January, Sunwest settled three lawsuits that accused it of ignoring staffing problems at its Meadowlark Assisted Living facility in Yreka, Calif. The California suits alleged staffing issues contributed to residents suffering serious, and sometimes, fatal injuries from falls. Terms prevented attorneys from discussing details of the settlements.
Stebner, the same attorney who filed the recent lawsuit in Oregon, also represented families in the Meadowlark cases.
mrose@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 399-6657
Some Speak Against New Measure 37 Compromise
PETER WONG
Statesman Journal
March 31, 2007
When it comes to the Legislature's latest plan to fix flaws in Oregon's land-use compensation law, both sides in the controversy over a proposed subdivision in the hills south of Salem are agreed.
They don't like it.
The plan -- which two lawmakers and a deputy chief of staff to Gov. Ted Kulongoski disclosed Thursday night -- would clear the way for smaller developments but limit or bar big ones.
The law, which voters passed as Measure 37 in 2004, requires government either to pay landowners or waive rules when those rules result in reduced property values. Thousands of claims were filed before a Dec. 5 deadline, and landowners can go to court to seek compensation if governments cannot resolve them within six months.
The latest plan still has to be put in the form of a bill by the committee before it goes to votes in each chamber.
It would clear the way for pre-1994 landowners to proceed with houses on up to three sites, a maximum of three on one open site, and guarantee most claimants at least one site.
Some landowners could develop up to 10 sites, and a maximum of 30 homes, if they can demonstrate their property-value losses, adjusted for previous tax breaks.
"Actually, I think it's worse than the governor's original proposal in some ways," Hines said. "We are not real happy with the idea of 10 sites being allowed because it's still going to create a ring of subdivisions around us.
Under either option, development would be limited or barred on high-value farmland and in areas with limited groundwater supplies.
High-value farmland is defined under a 1993 law by soil quality and agricultural production. Macpherson said it's intended to protect Oregon's best farmland in the Willamette and Hood River valleys, including vineyards and orchards.
Laack said those conditions in the latest plan amount to a pretext for government to do nothing for landowners filing claims.
pwong@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 399-6745
Statesman Journal
March 31, 2007
When it comes to the Legislature's latest plan to fix flaws in Oregon's land-use compensation law, both sides in the controversy over a proposed subdivision in the hills south of Salem are agreed.
They don't like it.
The plan -- which two lawmakers and a deputy chief of staff to Gov. Ted Kulongoski disclosed Thursday night -- would clear the way for smaller developments but limit or bar big ones.
The law, which voters passed as Measure 37 in 2004, requires government either to pay landowners or waive rules when those rules result in reduced property values. Thousands of claims were filed before a Dec. 5 deadline, and landowners can go to court to seek compensation if governments cannot resolve them within six months.
The latest plan still has to be put in the form of a bill by the committee before it goes to votes in each chamber.
It would clear the way for pre-1994 landowners to proceed with houses on up to three sites, a maximum of three on one open site, and guarantee most claimants at least one site.
Some landowners could develop up to 10 sites, and a maximum of 30 homes, if they can demonstrate their property-value losses, adjusted for previous tax breaks.
"Actually, I think it's worse than the governor's original proposal in some ways," Hines said. "We are not real happy with the idea of 10 sites being allowed because it's still going to create a ring of subdivisions around us.
Under either option, development would be limited or barred on high-value farmland and in areas with limited groundwater supplies.
High-value farmland is defined under a 1993 law by soil quality and agricultural production. Macpherson said it's intended to protect Oregon's best farmland in the Willamette and Hood River valleys, including vineyards and orchards.
Laack said those conditions in the latest plan amount to a pretext for government to do nothing for landowners filing claims.
pwong@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 399-6745
Sunday, March 18, 2007
Summary of News Events this Week by Mark Young
Most Recommended Stories
Sun. March 18, 2007
1. Powwow brings past to present
2. Oregon needs U.S. to reform immigration
3. Winthrop could present major challenge for Ducks
4. 781 vehicles were stolen in Salem in 2006
5. Robinson: What Barack Obama has to tell us
6. Libby verdict part of partisan witch hunt, 'process crime'
To view these articles link onto the Statesman Journal link provided in this Blog.
The issue of deporting foreign-born criminals should be a priority for the U.S. immigration service. With the number of criminal immigrants in the Oregon penal system between 6 and 8 percent of the total prison population this burden on the taxpaying citizens of Oregon is unwarranted. The financial resources spent on detaining these individuals could be better spent elsewhere! However, caution should be used that innocent immigrants are not caught up in this action. As stated in this article U.S. born citizens are more likely to commit crimes than foreign born citizens by a wide margin. The goods and services that migrant workers provide
to Oregon and the U.S. in general, are enormous and help to keep our economy working. Too often immigrants are not given the proper credit for their contributions to our society. It is the cultural diversity of America that remains as one of our strongest heritages.
Sociology 348:
Two urban issues that I will cover this semester are urban/suburban planning and socially excluded groups. In particular, how federal and state policies affect a cities development(eminent domain, zoning, etc.)by controlling any future construction. As to socially excluded groups, I will report on how these groups (homeless, ethnic minorities, disaffected youth, etc.) are affected by legislation and various economic factors(employment, immigration status, etc.) within our society.
Sun. March 18, 2007
1. Powwow brings past to present
2. Oregon needs U.S. to reform immigration
3. Winthrop could present major challenge for Ducks
4. 781 vehicles were stolen in Salem in 2006
5. Robinson: What Barack Obama has to tell us
6. Libby verdict part of partisan witch hunt, 'process crime'
To view these articles link onto the Statesman Journal link provided in this Blog.
The issue of deporting foreign-born criminals should be a priority for the U.S. immigration service. With the number of criminal immigrants in the Oregon penal system between 6 and 8 percent of the total prison population this burden on the taxpaying citizens of Oregon is unwarranted. The financial resources spent on detaining these individuals could be better spent elsewhere! However, caution should be used that innocent immigrants are not caught up in this action. As stated in this article U.S. born citizens are more likely to commit crimes than foreign born citizens by a wide margin. The goods and services that migrant workers provide
to Oregon and the U.S. in general, are enormous and help to keep our economy working. Too often immigrants are not given the proper credit for their contributions to our society. It is the cultural diversity of America that remains as one of our strongest heritages.
Sociology 348:
Two urban issues that I will cover this semester are urban/suburban planning and socially excluded groups. In particular, how federal and state policies affect a cities development(eminent domain, zoning, etc.)by controlling any future construction. As to socially excluded groups, I will report on how these groups (homeless, ethnic minorities, disaffected youth, etc.) are affected by legislation and various economic factors(employment, immigration status, etc.) within our society.
Saturday, March 17, 2007
Deportation Efforts Snare More Noncriminals
THELMA GUERRERO
Statesman Journal
March 15, 2007
Rogelio Corona-Cuevas, a Mexican national, killed two members of a family in a 2003 drunken-driving collision north of Salem. Despite the illegal immigrant's five-year-long record of drunken driving and probation violations, he was never sent back to his home country.
Carlos Bernard Dennis, a Jamaican, broke into a Salem apartment, robbed the home and cut the occupant with a knife. The undocumented immigrant previously had been detained for driving with a suspended license and leaving the scene of an accident. He slipped through the cracks, however, remaining in the United States and committing another crime.
Deporting foreign-born criminals is supposed to be a priority for the U.S. immigration system, second only to national security.
However, a review of recent data shows that some criminal aliens have remained in the United States even after they have completed their sentences, while taxpayer money is used to nab people who are in the country illegally but who have no criminal record.
In the past 10 years, the number of criminal aliens doing time in Oregon prisons has fluctuated between 6 percent and 8 percent of the total prison population.
The numbers do not sit well with critics who say that keeping foreign-born criminals locked up in the state's prisons burdens taxpayers with the millions of dollars it costs to house them.
Some people want the heat turned up on the federal government to deport these inmates as soon as they walk out of prison doors.
Border-control advocates say that would help reduce the number of people who enter the country illegally and would curb the number of repeat offenders.
"It would send the message that this kind of behavior is not acceptable," said Salem resident Ken Evans, a government-relations specialist and former lobbyist.
Immigrant-rights advocates counter by pointing out that U.S.-born people commit more crimes than immigrants.
A 2006 Harvard University study supports their position, concluding that immigrants, both legal and illegal, are 45 percent less likely than Americans to commit crimes.
Paying for inmates
On Jan. 1, the total inmate population in the state's 13 prisons was 13,292, according to the Oregon Department of Corrections.
Foreign-born aliens accounted for 1,007, or about 8 percent, of the total prison population. Eighty percent of those were Mexican citizens. Some are repeat offenders.
Last year, the corrections department charged the federal government $32.5 million, the state's cost to house 1,722 foreign-born criminals lodged in state prisons between July 2004 and June 2005.
As of this week, Oregon's 2006 federal reimbursement had not been received or determined, DOC officials said.
Through its State Criminal Alien Assistance Program, or SCAAP, the federal government reimburses state and local governments the cost to keep undocumented criminals locked up. But federal reimbursement often comes up short, leaving states and counties to foot the full bill.
A recent report by the U.S. Department of Justice found that states with high immigrant populations typically receive only 25 percent of the cost to house criminal aliens in prisons. States with smaller immigrant populations such as Oregon receive less than that amount.
Evans offered a possible solution to the problem.
"We should have the inmates' countries of origin pay for their incarceration," he said.
Oregon rules
Oregon state law prohibits law enforcement officials from checking the immigration status of a person arrested for a crime, resulting in law enforcement officials' not turning over suspected illegal immigrants to immigration agents.
Meanwhile, the state Department of Corrections has the task of holding criminal aliens in prison.
That helps ensure "that the appropriate punishment given by an Oregon judge to individuals deemed as criminal aliens is served to completion," said DOC director Max Williams.
Statesman Journal
March 15, 2007
Rogelio Corona-Cuevas, a Mexican national, killed two members of a family in a 2003 drunken-driving collision north of Salem. Despite the illegal immigrant's five-year-long record of drunken driving and probation violations, he was never sent back to his home country.
Carlos Bernard Dennis, a Jamaican, broke into a Salem apartment, robbed the home and cut the occupant with a knife. The undocumented immigrant previously had been detained for driving with a suspended license and leaving the scene of an accident. He slipped through the cracks, however, remaining in the United States and committing another crime.
Deporting foreign-born criminals is supposed to be a priority for the U.S. immigration system, second only to national security.
However, a review of recent data shows that some criminal aliens have remained in the United States even after they have completed their sentences, while taxpayer money is used to nab people who are in the country illegally but who have no criminal record.
In the past 10 years, the number of criminal aliens doing time in Oregon prisons has fluctuated between 6 percent and 8 percent of the total prison population.
The numbers do not sit well with critics who say that keeping foreign-born criminals locked up in the state's prisons burdens taxpayers with the millions of dollars it costs to house them.
Some people want the heat turned up on the federal government to deport these inmates as soon as they walk out of prison doors.
Border-control advocates say that would help reduce the number of people who enter the country illegally and would curb the number of repeat offenders.
"It would send the message that this kind of behavior is not acceptable," said Salem resident Ken Evans, a government-relations specialist and former lobbyist.
Immigrant-rights advocates counter by pointing out that U.S.-born people commit more crimes than immigrants.
A 2006 Harvard University study supports their position, concluding that immigrants, both legal and illegal, are 45 percent less likely than Americans to commit crimes.
Paying for inmates
On Jan. 1, the total inmate population in the state's 13 prisons was 13,292, according to the Oregon Department of Corrections.
Foreign-born aliens accounted for 1,007, or about 8 percent, of the total prison population. Eighty percent of those were Mexican citizens. Some are repeat offenders.
Last year, the corrections department charged the federal government $32.5 million, the state's cost to house 1,722 foreign-born criminals lodged in state prisons between July 2004 and June 2005.
As of this week, Oregon's 2006 federal reimbursement had not been received or determined, DOC officials said.
Through its State Criminal Alien Assistance Program, or SCAAP, the federal government reimburses state and local governments the cost to keep undocumented criminals locked up. But federal reimbursement often comes up short, leaving states and counties to foot the full bill.
A recent report by the U.S. Department of Justice found that states with high immigrant populations typically receive only 25 percent of the cost to house criminal aliens in prisons. States with smaller immigrant populations such as Oregon receive less than that amount.
Evans offered a possible solution to the problem.
"We should have the inmates' countries of origin pay for their incarceration," he said.
Oregon rules
Oregon state law prohibits law enforcement officials from checking the immigration status of a person arrested for a crime, resulting in law enforcement officials' not turning over suspected illegal immigrants to immigration agents.
Meanwhile, the state Department of Corrections has the task of holding criminal aliens in prison.
That helps ensure "that the appropriate punishment given by an Oregon judge to individuals deemed as criminal aliens is served to completion," said DOC director Max Williams.
Developer, Neighbors Appeal Land-Use Ruling
BETH CASPER
Statesman Journal
March 17, 2007
Property owners with approval -- under one of the first Measure 37 claims in Marion County -- to build on 217 acres in the hills south of Salem won't break ground anytime soon.
Both the owners and neighbors near the proposed subdivision have appealed the county planning commission's decision, which reduced the number of lots from 43 to 28.
LeRoy Laack, one of the property owners, said he is frustrated with the interference by government -- partly because the delay is costly. He said the process has cost thousands of dollars.
"I am very much opposed to too much regulation from any municipality," he said. "The thing that has made America a great country is people have a say in what they do."
Neighbors around the proposed development worry mainly about the new wells affecting existing groundwater supplies. They also are frustrated by the county's decision because they have spent close to $20,000 fighting the development.
"It seems to me the cost should be on the developers," neighbor Laurel Hines said. "They should have to explore the resources before they allow the new use."
The new development is on land zoned exclusively for farm use. But Laack and another one of the four owners qualified for the development under Measure 37, which requires local governments to pay for value reductions caused by land-use regulations or waive the regulations.
After three packed hearings, the county planning commissioners approved the subdivision as long as the landowner reconfigured the parcels so that there are no more than 28 lots of at least five acres each, and one 80-acre lot. The owners originally proposed 43 lots.
Owners also have to review the area's available groundwater. A review is a less intense effort because it considers existing wellwater data and does not require scientists to collect new data.
bcasper@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 589-6994
Statesman Journal
March 17, 2007
Property owners with approval -- under one of the first Measure 37 claims in Marion County -- to build on 217 acres in the hills south of Salem won't break ground anytime soon.
Both the owners and neighbors near the proposed subdivision have appealed the county planning commission's decision, which reduced the number of lots from 43 to 28.
LeRoy Laack, one of the property owners, said he is frustrated with the interference by government -- partly because the delay is costly. He said the process has cost thousands of dollars.
"I am very much opposed to too much regulation from any municipality," he said. "The thing that has made America a great country is people have a say in what they do."
Neighbors around the proposed development worry mainly about the new wells affecting existing groundwater supplies. They also are frustrated by the county's decision because they have spent close to $20,000 fighting the development.
"It seems to me the cost should be on the developers," neighbor Laurel Hines said. "They should have to explore the resources before they allow the new use."
The new development is on land zoned exclusively for farm use. But Laack and another one of the four owners qualified for the development under Measure 37, which requires local governments to pay for value reductions caused by land-use regulations or waive the regulations.
After three packed hearings, the county planning commissioners approved the subdivision as long as the landowner reconfigured the parcels so that there are no more than 28 lots of at least five acres each, and one 80-acre lot. The owners originally proposed 43 lots.
Owners also have to review the area's available groundwater. A review is a less intense effort because it considers existing wellwater data and does not require scientists to collect new data.
bcasper@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 589-6994
Meth Suspect's Son Hopes She Gets Treatment
BY RUTH LIAO
Statesman Journal
March 17, 2007
The 17 children taken into protective custody during a series of a drug-related arrests in Salem this week have been placed in stable care, officials said Friday.
Salem police arrested 12 adults in meth busts during a 14-hour investigation beginning Wednesday. Children from four households and ranging in age from one month to 17 years were taken into state care following those arrested.
One of those 17 is Angel Cervantes-Shull, 17, who is staying with an older sister. Angel said he wants his mother to receive treatment -- not go to prison.
"I guess this is the only way I can get my prayers answered," Angel said of his mother, Evyette Mayla Shull, 51. "I just don't want my mom to be gone for a long time."
Shull was arrested on charges that included possession and delivery of methamphetamine, first-degree child neglect and endangering the welfare of a child.
Angel described his mother as a sweet, caring parent who struggled to raise his siblings on Social Security and food stamps. When her kids needed something, she went without, Angel said.
Angel, who will turn 18 in July, has been talking with local radio stations and television stations in an attempt to tell his mother's story since her arrest.
Police also accuse Shull of sending Angel's 15-year-old brother to deliver drugs.
Angel's younger brother remained in foster care Friday. It was not clear whether charges were pending against him. Angel said his brother is shy and introverted and not the type to use drugs.
"It sucks to see my brother suffer for the mistakes my mom did," Angel said.
Angel said his mother suffered chronic pain and illness. He said she occasionally smoked meth, but he never saw her smoke in front of him. Angel said he recently suspected his mother was using meth when she needed to get dentures.
Shull has previous second-degree theft charges from Aumsville and Salem. Angel said she shoplifted household items that she needed for him and his brother -- toiletries such as shampoo, and razors so that Angel could shave.
"She put everyone before herself," Angel said.
Angel, who said he works seasonally with his father at Fordyce Farm, said he knows his mom committed a crime. Angel said he's glad -- in a way -- that his mother was caught so she could get help.
"I just want for her to get help and get healthy," Angel said. "That's all I want for my mom."
rliao@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 589-6941
Statesman Journal
March 17, 2007
The 17 children taken into protective custody during a series of a drug-related arrests in Salem this week have been placed in stable care, officials said Friday.
Salem police arrested 12 adults in meth busts during a 14-hour investigation beginning Wednesday. Children from four households and ranging in age from one month to 17 years were taken into state care following those arrested.
One of those 17 is Angel Cervantes-Shull, 17, who is staying with an older sister. Angel said he wants his mother to receive treatment -- not go to prison.
"I guess this is the only way I can get my prayers answered," Angel said of his mother, Evyette Mayla Shull, 51. "I just don't want my mom to be gone for a long time."
Shull was arrested on charges that included possession and delivery of methamphetamine, first-degree child neglect and endangering the welfare of a child.
Angel described his mother as a sweet, caring parent who struggled to raise his siblings on Social Security and food stamps. When her kids needed something, she went without, Angel said.
Angel, who will turn 18 in July, has been talking with local radio stations and television stations in an attempt to tell his mother's story since her arrest.
Police also accuse Shull of sending Angel's 15-year-old brother to deliver drugs.
Angel's younger brother remained in foster care Friday. It was not clear whether charges were pending against him. Angel said his brother is shy and introverted and not the type to use drugs.
"It sucks to see my brother suffer for the mistakes my mom did," Angel said.
Angel said his mother suffered chronic pain and illness. He said she occasionally smoked meth, but he never saw her smoke in front of him. Angel said he recently suspected his mother was using meth when she needed to get dentures.
Shull has previous second-degree theft charges from Aumsville and Salem. Angel said she shoplifted household items that she needed for him and his brother -- toiletries such as shampoo, and razors so that Angel could shave.
"She put everyone before herself," Angel said.
Angel, who said he works seasonally with his father at Fordyce Farm, said he knows his mom committed a crime. Angel said he's glad -- in a way -- that his mother was caught so she could get help.
"I just want for her to get help and get healthy," Angel said. "That's all I want for my mom."
rliao@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 589-6941
Sunday, March 11, 2007
Summary of News Events this Week by Mark Young
Most Recommended Stories
Sun. March 11, 2007
1. Field burning ban would improve quality of health in Oregon
2. The censorship of science undermines democracy
3. Salem police could use vacant buildings to add jail space
4. Despite Castro's best intentions, racism lingers in Cuba
These articles can be accessed by using the Statesman Journal link found in the "links" section of this Blog.
The article "Hispanic Workers Lead U.S. Job Growth" had the greatest relevance to this weeks reading. In particular, I direct you to the last paragraph, which stated that while the median weekly earnings increased for Hispanic workers in general, the earnings of "foreign-born Hispanic workers" actually decreased in 2006. Chapter seven of our text describes the exploitation of workers in third world countries. Yet here, in the richest country in the world it is much the same. As long as the employers of these undocumented workers continue to break the law by exploiting this slave labor, America is no better than the least of them. We have are own "third world" citizens living right here!
Sun. March 11, 2007
1. Field burning ban would improve quality of health in Oregon
2. The censorship of science undermines democracy
3. Salem police could use vacant buildings to add jail space
4. Despite Castro's best intentions, racism lingers in Cuba
These articles can be accessed by using the Statesman Journal link found in the "links" section of this Blog.
The article "Hispanic Workers Lead U.S. Job Growth" had the greatest relevance to this weeks reading. In particular, I direct you to the last paragraph, which stated that while the median weekly earnings increased for Hispanic workers in general, the earnings of "foreign-born Hispanic workers" actually decreased in 2006. Chapter seven of our text describes the exploitation of workers in third world countries. Yet here, in the richest country in the world it is much the same. As long as the employers of these undocumented workers continue to break the law by exploiting this slave labor, America is no better than the least of them. We have are own "third world" citizens living right here!
Hispanic Worker's Lead U.S. Job Growth
THELMA GUERRERO
Statesman Journal
March 11, 2007
Hispanics make up 13.6 percent of the U.S. employment population but accounted for 36.7 percent of the 2006 U.S. job growth, according to the Pew Hispanic Center.
The construction industry was a key source of jobs for Hispanics, despite a slump in the housing market. Hispanic workers landed two out of three new construction jobs in 2006, Pew analysts said.
Most of those jobs were in the West and South, which is consistent with the overall distribution of the Hispanic work force, according to the Pew fact sheet.
"That puts Oregon in a category that's above the national average of new jobs being landed by Hispanics," said Art Ayre, an economist with the Oregon Employment Department.
In Oregon, Hispanics increased their grip in construction occupations from 12.5 percent in 2002 to 14 percent in 2005, officials at the Bureau of Labor Statistics said.
The Pew Hispanic Center estimates that in recent years about two-thirds of the rise in the employment of recently arrived Hispanics was due to authorized migration.
The median weekly earnings of Hispanic workers increased from $420 to $428 between 2005 and 2006, the fact sheet found. The median weekly earnings of foreign-born Hispanic workers fell from $400 to $388 in 2006.
tguerrero@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 399-6815
Statesman Journal
March 11, 2007
Hispanics make up 13.6 percent of the U.S. employment population but accounted for 36.7 percent of the 2006 U.S. job growth, according to the Pew Hispanic Center.
The construction industry was a key source of jobs for Hispanics, despite a slump in the housing market. Hispanic workers landed two out of three new construction jobs in 2006, Pew analysts said.
Most of those jobs were in the West and South, which is consistent with the overall distribution of the Hispanic work force, according to the Pew fact sheet.
"That puts Oregon in a category that's above the national average of new jobs being landed by Hispanics," said Art Ayre, an economist with the Oregon Employment Department.
In Oregon, Hispanics increased their grip in construction occupations from 12.5 percent in 2002 to 14 percent in 2005, officials at the Bureau of Labor Statistics said.
The Pew Hispanic Center estimates that in recent years about two-thirds of the rise in the employment of recently arrived Hispanics was due to authorized migration.
The median weekly earnings of Hispanic workers increased from $420 to $428 between 2005 and 2006, the fact sheet found. The median weekly earnings of foreign-born Hispanic workers fell from $400 to $388 in 2006.
tguerrero@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 399-6815
Friday, March 9, 2007
Overprotecting Kids is Dangerous in the Long Run!
March 9, 2007
"Save the children" is the battle cry we hear from many legislators who sponsor bills such as SB 49. Should we legislatively be discouraging an activity that brings children and families together in a fun, wholesome and recreational activity?
What about horseback riding? Should we make a law prohibiting Hanna and Conner from riding a 1,500-pound, unpredictable mass of potential injury and death?
The gravest concern I have about this type of bill is this: Should we, as a society, be mitigating any and all the risk we can to our children? When does the overprotection of our children become a detriment to them later as adults? We protect, protect and overprotect some more; then, our children turn 18 and they get the cold hard boot of reality.
At that time, we expect them to know how to take appropriate risk in the college classroom, in business, in a profession or in a trade. Thank goodness for the soldiers, farmers, police, firefighters, business owners, entrepreneurs, mothers and fathers who teach their children that "risk" is an essential part of "life."
The road to hell is paved with good intentions. Let's not go down that path.
-- Alex Olsen, Keizer
"Save the children" is the battle cry we hear from many legislators who sponsor bills such as SB 49. Should we legislatively be discouraging an activity that brings children and families together in a fun, wholesome and recreational activity?
What about horseback riding? Should we make a law prohibiting Hanna and Conner from riding a 1,500-pound, unpredictable mass of potential injury and death?
The gravest concern I have about this type of bill is this: Should we, as a society, be mitigating any and all the risk we can to our children? When does the overprotection of our children become a detriment to them later as adults? We protect, protect and overprotect some more; then, our children turn 18 and they get the cold hard boot of reality.
At that time, we expect them to know how to take appropriate risk in the college classroom, in business, in a profession or in a trade. Thank goodness for the soldiers, farmers, police, firefighters, business owners, entrepreneurs, mothers and fathers who teach their children that "risk" is an essential part of "life."
The road to hell is paved with good intentions. Let's not go down that path.
-- Alex Olsen, Keizer
The End of Logging Subsides?
By Jeff Barnard
the Associated Press
March 9, 2007
TALENT — The end of a little-known federal subsidy that funneled millions of dollars to rural counties to compensate them for restrictions on logging is forcing communities in the West to close libraries, reduce police patrols and put off road repairs.
“We’re building libraries in Iraq and we are not funding libraries in Jackson County,” Dana Rayburn grumbled as she looked for a book for her first-grader in the brand-new Talent branch library, one of 15 in Oregon’s Jackson County now slated to close.
For generations, revenue from the cutting of timber in national forests allowed many rural counties in the West to build roads and schools and cover other expenses. The money enabled some counties to keep their property taxes extraordinarily low.
In the 1990s, though, restrictions aimed at protecting spotted owls, salmon and other wildlife led to severe cutbacks in logging, and Congress authorized subsidies to timber communities to cushion the blow.
Now, those subsidies are coming to an end. Late last year, Congress refused to renew the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000, which has paid out $2.9 billion over the past six years to 700 counties in 39 states. The last checks are going out this month.
To make up for the lost revenue, Lane County, home to the University of Oregon, has instituted an income tax. And three other counties in Oregon’s rugged timber country have put property tax increases on their May ballots.
But rural Oregon has a reputation for hating taxes and is not afraid to vote down increases even for such things as schools and libraries.
“We wouldn’t need these taxes if we went back to sustainable logging,” she said. Because of logging cutbacks, “the social and economic welfare of people I know in the past 20 some years has gone straight downhill. I’ve seen people have to go on welfare. The drinking starts. The divorces.”
The federal government has been sharing timber revenue with rural counties for nearly a century, under an arrangement worked out by President Theodore Roosevelt to gain their support for the creation of national forests.
National forest timber production hit highs of more than 12 billion board feet a year in the late 1960s and late 1980s, but plummeted 80 percent to 2.3 billion last year, in part because large swaths of the woods have been declared off-limits for environmental reasons. Last year’s harvest brought in just $221 million.
To make up for the downturn, Congress started giving Northwest timber communities subsidies in the 1990s to tide them over while they came up with new sources of revenue. After that expired, Congress passed the Secure Schools Act, which spread the safety net to all counties with national forests.
the Associated Press
March 9, 2007
TALENT — The end of a little-known federal subsidy that funneled millions of dollars to rural counties to compensate them for restrictions on logging is forcing communities in the West to close libraries, reduce police patrols and put off road repairs.
“We’re building libraries in Iraq and we are not funding libraries in Jackson County,” Dana Rayburn grumbled as she looked for a book for her first-grader in the brand-new Talent branch library, one of 15 in Oregon’s Jackson County now slated to close.
For generations, revenue from the cutting of timber in national forests allowed many rural counties in the West to build roads and schools and cover other expenses. The money enabled some counties to keep their property taxes extraordinarily low.
In the 1990s, though, restrictions aimed at protecting spotted owls, salmon and other wildlife led to severe cutbacks in logging, and Congress authorized subsidies to timber communities to cushion the blow.
Now, those subsidies are coming to an end. Late last year, Congress refused to renew the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000, which has paid out $2.9 billion over the past six years to 700 counties in 39 states. The last checks are going out this month.
To make up for the lost revenue, Lane County, home to the University of Oregon, has instituted an income tax. And three other counties in Oregon’s rugged timber country have put property tax increases on their May ballots.
But rural Oregon has a reputation for hating taxes and is not afraid to vote down increases even for such things as schools and libraries.
“We wouldn’t need these taxes if we went back to sustainable logging,” she said. Because of logging cutbacks, “the social and economic welfare of people I know in the past 20 some years has gone straight downhill. I’ve seen people have to go on welfare. The drinking starts. The divorces.”
The federal government has been sharing timber revenue with rural counties for nearly a century, under an arrangement worked out by President Theodore Roosevelt to gain their support for the creation of national forests.
National forest timber production hit highs of more than 12 billion board feet a year in the late 1960s and late 1980s, but plummeted 80 percent to 2.3 billion last year, in part because large swaths of the woods have been declared off-limits for environmental reasons. Last year’s harvest brought in just $221 million.
To make up for the downturn, Congress started giving Northwest timber communities subsidies in the 1990s to tide them over while they came up with new sources of revenue. After that expired, Congress passed the Secure Schools Act, which spread the safety net to all counties with national forests.
Saturday, March 3, 2007
Summary of News Events this Week by Mark Young
Most Recommended Stories
Sat. March 3, 2007
1. Target bad drivers, not older drivers
2. Air service will stay if it's used
3. Lawmakers won't fight illegal immigration
4. Sharing their stories to help others
5. Men, women serving in war deserve respect
6. Letters show parents divided about ex-teacher
7. More must be done to protect ocean
8. The Rant
9. Group elects new board member
10. Mercury and health connection isn't 'complicated'
These articles can be accessed by using the Statesman Journal link found in the "link" section of this blog.
"Disabled Residents Rally For Awareness"
Virginia Hill is another example of individuals who find themselves "socially excluded" from many things that average citizens take for granted. While she is "Mentally Impaired" this disability has not stopped her from trying to improve her life.
Virginia's steadfastness for better education and employment opportunities for the disabled is something to be admired. Too often in our society, physical or mental impairments leave individuals ostracized from the so called "normal" life that most of us enjoy.I hope that our legislators will give the issues that Virgina and others are bringing to the table their full attention. These citizens deserve their voices to be heard and to be treated with dignity and respect.
For more information on Virginia Hill see news article posted on this blog.
Sincerely, Mark J. Young
Sat. March 3, 2007
1. Target bad drivers, not older drivers
2. Air service will stay if it's used
3. Lawmakers won't fight illegal immigration
4. Sharing their stories to help others
5. Men, women serving in war deserve respect
6. Letters show parents divided about ex-teacher
7. More must be done to protect ocean
8. The Rant
9. Group elects new board member
10. Mercury and health connection isn't 'complicated'
These articles can be accessed by using the Statesman Journal link found in the "link" section of this blog.
"Disabled Residents Rally For Awareness"
Virginia Hill is another example of individuals who find themselves "socially excluded" from many things that average citizens take for granted. While she is "Mentally Impaired" this disability has not stopped her from trying to improve her life.
Virginia's steadfastness for better education and employment opportunities for the disabled is something to be admired. Too often in our society, physical or mental impairments leave individuals ostracized from the so called "normal" life that most of us enjoy.I hope that our legislators will give the issues that Virgina and others are bringing to the table their full attention. These citizens deserve their voices to be heard and to be treated with dignity and respect.
For more information on Virginia Hill see news article posted on this blog.
Sincerely, Mark J. Young
Bill To Help Mobile-Home Owners Stirs Debate
STEVE LAW
Statesman Journal
March 3, 2007
Mobile-home owners and landlords sat side by side Friday to present their joint approach to aid Oregonians displaced by mobile home park closures.
Lawmakers were so keen to see both sides compromise that 79 of 90 House and Senate members co-sponsored the coalition's proposal, House Bill 2735.
But the first hearing Friday before the House Consumer Protection Committee showed there's still significant opposition, despite 18 months' work to forge a compromise.
The Manufactured Housing Landlord/Tenant Coalition proposal would provide cash payments of $5,000 to $9,000 for mobile home owners forced from their parks. It would extend a $10,000 tax credit and enable more people to qualify. Home owners, whose homes plummet in value once a closure is announced, could leave their homes on site without having to pay thousands of dollars in disposal fees
Sixty-five mobile home parks have closed in Oregon since 1990, said Rep. Jerry Krummel, R-Wilsonville, but 31 of the closures occurred in just the past two years.
As a result, no other bill before the 2007 Legislature has so many co-sponsors, said Krummel, who has championed mobile home owner concerns the past two legislative sessions.
"This is a problem that's not going to go away," said Greg Harmon, the president of Commonwealth Real Estate Services, a major landlord and coalition member. The compromise bill "is the most generous and comprehensive mobile home park closure bill in the United States," he said.
But some mobile home owners say the bill doesn't go far enough.
Ashley Taylor, who lives in an older mobile home park in Silverton called Stardust Village, said the bill won't fully compensate her and her neighbors' losses if the park closes.
"I believe that we should get better compensation," Taylor said. "A lot of these people, if they lose their home, they've got nothing; $5,000 would take them nowhere."
Peter Ferris, a Waldport mobile-home owner, said what is needed is money to help owners buy the land underneath their homes.
State Rep. Paul Holvey, D-Eugene, the House committee chairman, said he hopes to produce some relief for displaced mobile home owners. "I don't think that we've got a comprehensive solution to this problem yet," Holvey said. That will take more than just this bill, he said.
"I do pray that they can come to some conclusion," Taylor said, "because newer parks than ours have closed and it hurts thousands and thousands of people that have nowhere else to go."
slaw@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 399-6615
Statesman Journal
March 3, 2007
Mobile-home owners and landlords sat side by side Friday to present their joint approach to aid Oregonians displaced by mobile home park closures.
Lawmakers were so keen to see both sides compromise that 79 of 90 House and Senate members co-sponsored the coalition's proposal, House Bill 2735.
But the first hearing Friday before the House Consumer Protection Committee showed there's still significant opposition, despite 18 months' work to forge a compromise.
The Manufactured Housing Landlord/Tenant Coalition proposal would provide cash payments of $5,000 to $9,000 for mobile home owners forced from their parks. It would extend a $10,000 tax credit and enable more people to qualify. Home owners, whose homes plummet in value once a closure is announced, could leave their homes on site without having to pay thousands of dollars in disposal fees
Sixty-five mobile home parks have closed in Oregon since 1990, said Rep. Jerry Krummel, R-Wilsonville, but 31 of the closures occurred in just the past two years.
As a result, no other bill before the 2007 Legislature has so many co-sponsors, said Krummel, who has championed mobile home owner concerns the past two legislative sessions.
"This is a problem that's not going to go away," said Greg Harmon, the president of Commonwealth Real Estate Services, a major landlord and coalition member. The compromise bill "is the most generous and comprehensive mobile home park closure bill in the United States," he said.
But some mobile home owners say the bill doesn't go far enough.
Ashley Taylor, who lives in an older mobile home park in Silverton called Stardust Village, said the bill won't fully compensate her and her neighbors' losses if the park closes.
"I believe that we should get better compensation," Taylor said. "A lot of these people, if they lose their home, they've got nothing; $5,000 would take them nowhere."
Peter Ferris, a Waldport mobile-home owner, said what is needed is money to help owners buy the land underneath their homes.
State Rep. Paul Holvey, D-Eugene, the House committee chairman, said he hopes to produce some relief for displaced mobile home owners. "I don't think that we've got a comprehensive solution to this problem yet," Holvey said. That will take more than just this bill, he said.
"I do pray that they can come to some conclusion," Taylor said, "because newer parks than ours have closed and it hurts thousands and thousands of people that have nowhere else to go."
slaw@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 399-6615
Disabled Residents Rally for Awareness
THELMA GUERRERO
Statesman Journal
March 3, 2007
Most days are a joy for Virginia Hill. Other days, it's a struggle to get past labels and other challenges she encounters in the community.
"I want to learn to read better," Hill, 26, said recently while taking a break from her job at Mount Angel Training Center. "But when I talked to different colleges about taking a reading class, they told me they didn't offer that for people like me."
So Hill, a 2002 graduate of Woodburn High School, decided to become a self-advocate for her disability, mental retardation.
On Friday, she and other people like her who rely on state social programs such as developmental services, foster care and mental-health services shared their stories during a rally on the steps of the state Capitol.
They were there to tell lawmakers that they are capable of making independent decisions, living on their own and to demand their voices be included in public policies that affect their lives.
"It's really important for self-advocates to tell their stories because it gives them a sense of empowerment," said Shelley Joyce, a spokeswoman for Victory Alliance, the organizer of Friday's rally
The presence of lawmakers at Friday's rally is an indication that attitudes among some policymakers are gradually shifting, advocates say.
State representatives Brian Clem, D-Salem, and Sara Gelser, D-Corvallis, spoke about measures they're sponsoring aimed at improving access to education, employment and transportation for the developmentally disabled.
Clinically, developmental disability refers to any lifetime handicapping condition that occurs before age 18 that significantly impairs learning, language skills, mobility and the ability for some to live independently. It includes mental retardation, autism, cerebral palsy, epilepsy and neurological disorders.
Decades ago, services for the developmentally disabled were concentrated in state-run institutions. Today, many disabled people are able to live on their own, attend school and hold jobs.
Self-advocates, such as Hill, say that far more people deemed developmentally disabled can assume a level of responsibility for decisions than is generally thought.
After being labeled mentally retarded, Hill attended special-education classes throughout school. She lived with her grandmother until several years ago, when the elderly woman passed away.
"I am independent," she said in abbreviated statements. "I don't feel different. I deserve to be treated with dignity and respect."
tguerrero@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 399-681
Statesman Journal
March 3, 2007
Most days are a joy for Virginia Hill. Other days, it's a struggle to get past labels and other challenges she encounters in the community.
"I want to learn to read better," Hill, 26, said recently while taking a break from her job at Mount Angel Training Center. "But when I talked to different colleges about taking a reading class, they told me they didn't offer that for people like me."
So Hill, a 2002 graduate of Woodburn High School, decided to become a self-advocate for her disability, mental retardation.
On Friday, she and other people like her who rely on state social programs such as developmental services, foster care and mental-health services shared their stories during a rally on the steps of the state Capitol.
They were there to tell lawmakers that they are capable of making independent decisions, living on their own and to demand their voices be included in public policies that affect their lives.
"It's really important for self-advocates to tell their stories because it gives them a sense of empowerment," said Shelley Joyce, a spokeswoman for Victory Alliance, the organizer of Friday's rally
The presence of lawmakers at Friday's rally is an indication that attitudes among some policymakers are gradually shifting, advocates say.
State representatives Brian Clem, D-Salem, and Sara Gelser, D-Corvallis, spoke about measures they're sponsoring aimed at improving access to education, employment and transportation for the developmentally disabled.
Clinically, developmental disability refers to any lifetime handicapping condition that occurs before age 18 that significantly impairs learning, language skills, mobility and the ability for some to live independently. It includes mental retardation, autism, cerebral palsy, epilepsy and neurological disorders.
Decades ago, services for the developmentally disabled were concentrated in state-run institutions. Today, many disabled people are able to live on their own, attend school and hold jobs.
Self-advocates, such as Hill, say that far more people deemed developmentally disabled can assume a level of responsibility for decisions than is generally thought.
After being labeled mentally retarded, Hill attended special-education classes throughout school. She lived with her grandmother until several years ago, when the elderly woman passed away.
"I am independent," she said in abbreviated statements. "I don't feel different. I deserve to be treated with dignity and respect."
tguerrero@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 399-681
Sunday, February 25, 2007
Summary of News Events this Week by Mark Young
Most Recommended Stories
Sun. February 25, 2007
1. Adult ATVs kill children
2. Firefighters revive terrier after house fire
3. Fairgrounds makeover sought
4. Cold sufferers suffer under anti-meth law
5. Ducks sweep Washington teams
6. Crew helps Camp Kilowan recover from storms
7. Family fights eviction from manufactured-home park
To review any of stories simply use the link provided to the "Statesman Journal" found in the "Blog Archive" section and click onto the "Most Recomended Stories" link.
Of these "Most Recommended Stories" the one that struck closest to home was the "Family fights eviction from manufactured-home park".This article reminded me that all of us are only one "pen stroke" away from losing our homes. Recent court decisions favoring the use of "emminent domain" for corporate owned real estate development concerns, makes me wonder what the future holds for many hard working, tax paying citizens here in America.The "American Dream" of owning ones home without the fear of it being taken away, so the rich can become richer, is truly frightening. Wake up America, you could be next!
Sun. February 25, 2007
1. Adult ATVs kill children
2. Firefighters revive terrier after house fire
3. Fairgrounds makeover sought
4. Cold sufferers suffer under anti-meth law
5. Ducks sweep Washington teams
6. Crew helps Camp Kilowan recover from storms
7. Family fights eviction from manufactured-home park
To review any of stories simply use the link provided to the "Statesman Journal" found in the "Blog Archive" section and click onto the "Most Recomended Stories" link.
Of these "Most Recommended Stories" the one that struck closest to home was the "Family fights eviction from manufactured-home park".This article reminded me that all of us are only one "pen stroke" away from losing our homes. Recent court decisions favoring the use of "emminent domain" for corporate owned real estate development concerns, makes me wonder what the future holds for many hard working, tax paying citizens here in America.The "American Dream" of owning ones home without the fear of it being taken away, so the rich can become richer, is truly frightening. Wake up America, you could be next!
Board Fails To Budge On Recycling Mandates
Link
www.deq.state.or.us/lq/sw/recovery/rpc.htm
Board won't budge on recycling mandates
Manufacturers take issue with new rules for plastic
BETH CASPER
Statesman Journal
February 25, 2007
The state's environmental commission rejected a request Friday by manufacturers to change recycling rules for plastic containers.
The rules are triggered when statewide plastic recycling rates drop below 25 percent. Last year, the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality estimated that 24.3 percent of plastic containers were recycled.
The rules would require manufacturers to increase recycled content in their containers; use bottles made of materials that are recycled at a rate of more than 25 percent; or use bottles that can be refilled at least five times.
"We have been flirting with the 25 percent thing since the year the rule was adopted (in 1991)," said Environmental Quality Commissioner Bill Blosser. "If I was a manufacturer, I would have been worried right away, not just in the last three months."
Pat McCormick, a representative for the Grocery Manufacturers Association and Food Products Association, said manufacturers will likely turn to the legislature to ensure the rules are not enforced.
McCormick said that the main problem is in separating the plastics from the rest of recyclables. Right now, one in every five plastic containers do not get recycled even though it was placed in a recycling bin. The problem occurs at the sorting facilities that deal with huge quantities of recycled plastics, paper and metal.
"For us, (figuring out how to capture all of the plastics) is the highest priority," he said. "We can't have it ending up in landfills. That is unacceptable."
In the Legislature, state Rep. Vicki Berger of Salem is sponsoring a bill to expand Oregon's bottle bill to cover water, a move expected to be opposed by grocers who don't want to spend more time and space handling bottle returns.
Rob Guttridge of the nonprofit Recycling Advocates said the manufacturers should do more to prevent so much plastic from being trashed -- not only because they use so much of it to package products, but also because the 25 percent figure is not ambitious enough.
"The standard of 25 percent is horribly low," he said. "It's the bottom floor -- not a worthy or hard-to-reach goal."
Loretta Pickerell of DEQ said it has been obvious that plastics recycling would not meet the goal.
bcasper@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 589-6994
www.deq.state.or.us/lq/sw/recovery/rpc.htm
Board won't budge on recycling mandates
Manufacturers take issue with new rules for plastic
BETH CASPER
Statesman Journal
February 25, 2007
The state's environmental commission rejected a request Friday by manufacturers to change recycling rules for plastic containers.
The rules are triggered when statewide plastic recycling rates drop below 25 percent. Last year, the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality estimated that 24.3 percent of plastic containers were recycled.
The rules would require manufacturers to increase recycled content in their containers; use bottles made of materials that are recycled at a rate of more than 25 percent; or use bottles that can be refilled at least five times.
"We have been flirting with the 25 percent thing since the year the rule was adopted (in 1991)," said Environmental Quality Commissioner Bill Blosser. "If I was a manufacturer, I would have been worried right away, not just in the last three months."
Pat McCormick, a representative for the Grocery Manufacturers Association and Food Products Association, said manufacturers will likely turn to the legislature to ensure the rules are not enforced.
McCormick said that the main problem is in separating the plastics from the rest of recyclables. Right now, one in every five plastic containers do not get recycled even though it was placed in a recycling bin. The problem occurs at the sorting facilities that deal with huge quantities of recycled plastics, paper and metal.
"For us, (figuring out how to capture all of the plastics) is the highest priority," he said. "We can't have it ending up in landfills. That is unacceptable."
In the Legislature, state Rep. Vicki Berger of Salem is sponsoring a bill to expand Oregon's bottle bill to cover water, a move expected to be opposed by grocers who don't want to spend more time and space handling bottle returns.
Rob Guttridge of the nonprofit Recycling Advocates said the manufacturers should do more to prevent so much plastic from being trashed -- not only because they use so much of it to package products, but also because the 25 percent figure is not ambitious enough.
"The standard of 25 percent is horribly low," he said. "It's the bottom floor -- not a worthy or hard-to-reach goal."
Loretta Pickerell of DEQ said it has been obvious that plastics recycling would not meet the goal.
bcasper@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 589-6994
New LegislationWould Aid Mobile-Home Owners
STEVE LAW
Statesman Journal
February 25, 2007
When Terra and Gary Stull bought their first home in Keizer's Berkshire Estates in 1998, it was a dream come true.
For $1,500 down, they moved into a new manufactured home with three bedrooms, two baths, oak kitchen cabinets and 1,420 square feet of living space. But like many who live in manufactured-home parks, Berkshire residents owned their homes but rented the land beneath them.
For the Stulls, rent was $320 per month plus payments on their $80,000 mortgage.
"It was a nice community to live in. They kept it real quiet," Terra Stull said.
The dream soured in April, when a neighbor spotted a city land-use notice on a nearby utility pole. Word quickly spread that Berkshire Estates was being redeveloped into a subdivision of "stick-built" homes.
By June, the Stulls and about 100 other homeowners were notified they had to move by Feb. 4 of this year.
Vacancies in other parks, often called mobile home parks, were scarce. So the homes' values fell. Homes at Berkshire that were newer and nicer than the Stulls' were selling for $25,000, the Stulls said, and relocating theirs would cost $15,000.
"We couldn't afford to move our home, so we ended up letting it go back to the bank, and we're going through bankruptcy," Terra Stull said. "We didn't have any choice. We owed almost $80,000 on the house."
The Stulls are luckier than many Berkshire Estates residents because they're still working, she said. Many are retirees, who find it harder to start anew. The Stulls, resettled in a Keizer apartment, said they would never buy another manufactured home.
"What keeps it from happening again?" Stull said. "It's happening all over the state of Oregon because there's no legislation to prevent it."
Closures abound
As real estate sizzles in Oregon, converting manufactured home parks into traditional subdivisions or other uses is tempting. Park owners have gotten cold calls from Seattle developers waving "gobs of money" to sell their sites, said John VanLandingham, a Legal Aid lawyer who helps coordinate the Manufactured Housing Landlord/Tenant Coalition.
Thunderbird Mobile Club in Wilsonville is the latest. Last week, the landlord notified 270 homeowners that they must move by March 2008.
Thirty-one home parks have closed in Oregon the past two years, displacing 1,500 households, according to State Rep. Jerry Krummel, R-Wilsonville.
Krummel helped pass a $10,000 tax credit for evicted homeowners in the 2005 legislative session. He's championing the issue again with other lawmakers and the landlord/tenant coalition.
No one is contending that Berkshire is doing anything illegal, and proposed bills would not prevent closures. But they could ease the financial pain for displaced homeowners such as the Stulls.
Bills in the works
One of Krummel's bills would renew the $10,000 tax credit and eliminate the $60,000 income cap for qualifying, as well as the $110,000 cap on the value of the home. The Stulls couldn't get the tax credit because they earn a combined $64,000.
Rep. Kim Thatcher, R-Keizer, is sponsoring a bill to require cities and counties to mail land-use notices to manufactured home owners in the affected area.
Now the owners are ignored because they are classified as renters -- they do not own the spaces on which their homes sit.
Some bills would make it easier for homeowners to buy the land under their homes. In New Hampshire, 70 parks have been purchased by manufactured home owners, said Dawn Phillips, an aide to Krummel and Thatcher.
The main legislation, House Bill 2735, incorporates Krummel's tax-credit provisions and proposals fashioned by the landlord/tenant coalition.
Coalition members have learned they must forge compromises to get the votes of Democrats and Republicans, VanLandingham said.
HB 2735 requires owners to pay displaced home owners $5,000 to $9,000, based on the size of their unit. Owners must give at least one year's notice before evictions. Tenants would no longer be charged for abandoning their homes on site, a common practice that often costs them several thousand dollars, VanLandingham said.
Industry benefits
Park owners, who prefer to call them manufactured-housing communities, won some concessions in the compromise bill. Their property value would be frozen for five years after they redevelop the site. The legislation also would pre-empt municipalities from enacting stricter ordinances. That would nullify pro-tenant ordinances in Wilsonville, Eugene, Bend and Oregon City.
Wilsonville requires landowners to reimburse tenants for all costs, find them a new location or buy the unit from them. A Clackamas County judge recently found the ordinance unconstitutional.
Chuck Carpenter, a former lawmaker who runs an industry group called the Manufactured Housing Communities of Oregon, said HB 2735 is a fair compromise.
The $10,000 tax credit, combined with direct payments to mobile home owners, means "some of their basic expenses will be met," Carpenter said. "We do know this is the most generous package that tenants are getting anywhere in the United States," he said.
State Sen. Kurt Schrader, D-Canby, the co-chairman of the Legislature's budget-writing committee, said Krummel's proposal to create a multimillion-dollar loan fund to aid mobile home owners is a stretch.
But he said HB 2735 has better prospects.
"I think it's smart for us to go with the deal that the owners and tenants have bought off on," Schrader said. "I'm very supportive of trying to find the money there."
slaw@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 399-6615
Statesman Journal
February 25, 2007
When Terra and Gary Stull bought their first home in Keizer's Berkshire Estates in 1998, it was a dream come true.
For $1,500 down, they moved into a new manufactured home with three bedrooms, two baths, oak kitchen cabinets and 1,420 square feet of living space. But like many who live in manufactured-home parks, Berkshire residents owned their homes but rented the land beneath them.
For the Stulls, rent was $320 per month plus payments on their $80,000 mortgage.
"It was a nice community to live in. They kept it real quiet," Terra Stull said.
The dream soured in April, when a neighbor spotted a city land-use notice on a nearby utility pole. Word quickly spread that Berkshire Estates was being redeveloped into a subdivision of "stick-built" homes.
By June, the Stulls and about 100 other homeowners were notified they had to move by Feb. 4 of this year.
Vacancies in other parks, often called mobile home parks, were scarce. So the homes' values fell. Homes at Berkshire that were newer and nicer than the Stulls' were selling for $25,000, the Stulls said, and relocating theirs would cost $15,000.
"We couldn't afford to move our home, so we ended up letting it go back to the bank, and we're going through bankruptcy," Terra Stull said. "We didn't have any choice. We owed almost $80,000 on the house."
The Stulls are luckier than many Berkshire Estates residents because they're still working, she said. Many are retirees, who find it harder to start anew. The Stulls, resettled in a Keizer apartment, said they would never buy another manufactured home.
"What keeps it from happening again?" Stull said. "It's happening all over the state of Oregon because there's no legislation to prevent it."
Closures abound
As real estate sizzles in Oregon, converting manufactured home parks into traditional subdivisions or other uses is tempting. Park owners have gotten cold calls from Seattle developers waving "gobs of money" to sell their sites, said John VanLandingham, a Legal Aid lawyer who helps coordinate the Manufactured Housing Landlord/Tenant Coalition.
Thunderbird Mobile Club in Wilsonville is the latest. Last week, the landlord notified 270 homeowners that they must move by March 2008.
Thirty-one home parks have closed in Oregon the past two years, displacing 1,500 households, according to State Rep. Jerry Krummel, R-Wilsonville.
Krummel helped pass a $10,000 tax credit for evicted homeowners in the 2005 legislative session. He's championing the issue again with other lawmakers and the landlord/tenant coalition.
No one is contending that Berkshire is doing anything illegal, and proposed bills would not prevent closures. But they could ease the financial pain for displaced homeowners such as the Stulls.
Bills in the works
One of Krummel's bills would renew the $10,000 tax credit and eliminate the $60,000 income cap for qualifying, as well as the $110,000 cap on the value of the home. The Stulls couldn't get the tax credit because they earn a combined $64,000.
Rep. Kim Thatcher, R-Keizer, is sponsoring a bill to require cities and counties to mail land-use notices to manufactured home owners in the affected area.
Now the owners are ignored because they are classified as renters -- they do not own the spaces on which their homes sit.
Some bills would make it easier for homeowners to buy the land under their homes. In New Hampshire, 70 parks have been purchased by manufactured home owners, said Dawn Phillips, an aide to Krummel and Thatcher.
The main legislation, House Bill 2735, incorporates Krummel's tax-credit provisions and proposals fashioned by the landlord/tenant coalition.
Coalition members have learned they must forge compromises to get the votes of Democrats and Republicans, VanLandingham said.
HB 2735 requires owners to pay displaced home owners $5,000 to $9,000, based on the size of their unit. Owners must give at least one year's notice before evictions. Tenants would no longer be charged for abandoning their homes on site, a common practice that often costs them several thousand dollars, VanLandingham said.
Industry benefits
Park owners, who prefer to call them manufactured-housing communities, won some concessions in the compromise bill. Their property value would be frozen for five years after they redevelop the site. The legislation also would pre-empt municipalities from enacting stricter ordinances. That would nullify pro-tenant ordinances in Wilsonville, Eugene, Bend and Oregon City.
Wilsonville requires landowners to reimburse tenants for all costs, find them a new location or buy the unit from them. A Clackamas County judge recently found the ordinance unconstitutional.
Chuck Carpenter, a former lawmaker who runs an industry group called the Manufactured Housing Communities of Oregon, said HB 2735 is a fair compromise.
The $10,000 tax credit, combined with direct payments to mobile home owners, means "some of their basic expenses will be met," Carpenter said. "We do know this is the most generous package that tenants are getting anywhere in the United States," he said.
State Sen. Kurt Schrader, D-Canby, the co-chairman of the Legislature's budget-writing committee, said Krummel's proposal to create a multimillion-dollar loan fund to aid mobile home owners is a stretch.
But he said HB 2735 has better prospects.
"I think it's smart for us to go with the deal that the owners and tenants have bought off on," Schrader said. "I'm very supportive of trying to find the money there."
slaw@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 399-6615
Monday, February 19, 2007
Editorial: By Mark Young
The Price We Pay For Graffiti:
The senseless waste of our private and tax dollars to repair the needless destruction of property by these graffiti “artists” (I use this term in the lightest sense) bears concern. What is this segment of our society trying to achieve through their mindless destruction of private property? Often the primary culprits in this supposed form of communication are the so called "street" gangs. Apparently, their lack of ambition and self-esteem directly correlates to the need for this destructive form of self expression. On a recent television broadcast a local entrepreneur was being interviewed about the impact that “graffiti” was having on her business. “If this continues I might have to close down”. This local entrepreneur wanted to promote her business by placing a sign on her property, but was afraid to do so because of its possible destruction. Hard working individuals such as this should not have to put up with this blatant disregard for their property. Wake up America and take a stand! Something must be done to stop these gangs from destroying our way of life. If we continue to allow these degenerates to control our cities how can we expect our children to prosper?
The senseless waste of our private and tax dollars to repair the needless destruction of property by these graffiti “artists” (I use this term in the lightest sense) bears concern. What is this segment of our society trying to achieve through their mindless destruction of private property? Often the primary culprits in this supposed form of communication are the so called "street" gangs. Apparently, their lack of ambition and self-esteem directly correlates to the need for this destructive form of self expression. On a recent television broadcast a local entrepreneur was being interviewed about the impact that “graffiti” was having on her business. “If this continues I might have to close down”. This local entrepreneur wanted to promote her business by placing a sign on her property, but was afraid to do so because of its possible destruction. Hard working individuals such as this should not have to put up with this blatant disregard for their property. Wake up America and take a stand! Something must be done to stop these gangs from destroying our way of life. If we continue to allow these degenerates to control our cities how can we expect our children to prosper?
Sunday, February 18, 2007
Neighborhood Groups Address Homelessness
WEST SALEM
Neighborhood group targets homelessness, other issues
BY EUNICE KIM
Statesman Journal
February 18, 2007
The West Salem Neighborhood Association has developed four goals that members want to start tackling this year to improve their community.
The goals include addressing the issue of homeless people living in Wallace Marine Park, upgrading West Salem Park, developing a list of places where sidewalks are needed and creating a community garden, association member Don Homuth said.
The goal regarding the homeless comes in response to problems West Salem residents have faced because of people living in Wallace Marine Park. They say problems include bicycle thefts, drug use and unsanitary conditions in the park.
It is not enough, association members say, for the city of Salem to sweep through the park a couple of times per year, rousting the homeless and cleaning up the area.
"You can't do anything today to fix it," Homuth said. "It has to be a long-term solution. It may be beyond the reach and capability of the neighborhood association."
Association members, though, can start generating ideas for solving the problem, he said, and work with the city, county and social-service agencies to take action.
"I think it's really exciting that the neighborhood association doesn't just come to the meetings and talk about complaints," association chairman Scott Erickson said. "We're actually looking to see what's broken and see what we can do to fix it. We actually focus on stuff to help the community be better."
ekim@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 399-6721
Neighborhood group targets homelessness, other issues
BY EUNICE KIM
Statesman Journal
February 18, 2007
The West Salem Neighborhood Association has developed four goals that members want to start tackling this year to improve their community.
The goals include addressing the issue of homeless people living in Wallace Marine Park, upgrading West Salem Park, developing a list of places where sidewalks are needed and creating a community garden, association member Don Homuth said.
The goal regarding the homeless comes in response to problems West Salem residents have faced because of people living in Wallace Marine Park. They say problems include bicycle thefts, drug use and unsanitary conditions in the park.
It is not enough, association members say, for the city of Salem to sweep through the park a couple of times per year, rousting the homeless and cleaning up the area.
"You can't do anything today to fix it," Homuth said. "It has to be a long-term solution. It may be beyond the reach and capability of the neighborhood association."
Association members, though, can start generating ideas for solving the problem, he said, and work with the city, county and social-service agencies to take action.
"I think it's really exciting that the neighborhood association doesn't just come to the meetings and talk about complaints," association chairman Scott Erickson said. "We're actually looking to see what's broken and see what we can do to fix it. We actually focus on stuff to help the community be better."
ekim@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 399-6721
Inmates Work to Remove Graffiti
BY RUTH LIAO
Statesman Journal
February 18, 2007
Salem native Ken McPherson hates seeing graffiti in his community. As an inmate, he can do something about it.
"I'm glad to be out here doing something for the community," he said.
McPherson was a member of an inmate work crew checking for graffiti under the Center Street bridge in Salem recently. The effort is a result of a partnership between the Oregon Department of Corrections and Salem Police Department.
The work crews handle any graffiti reported on state and city-owned property, said Kim Nelson of the police department's Graffiti Abatement program. Interstate 5 sound walls, freeway overpasses, bridges -- all are concrete spaces usually tagged by spray paint and needing constant painting, she said. Nelson keeps a list of 15 to 20 most-targeted locations.
The program originally began three years ago, but has been on hold for the past few months, Nelson said. It was relaunched with inmate work crews out of the Santiam Correctional Institution.
When the program was at a standstill, the response time to clean up graffiti on Nelson's hot list was about two weeks, she said. Now the response time is down to a day or two. If graffiti reoccurs in the same spot, which often happens, the crews are available for touch-ups.
"For the community, it's an obvious benefit," Hodgin said. "It's costly for the city or anyone else to pay for it to have it done."
The crew's labor is a volunteer service to the city, said Dan Bielenberg, an inmate work program coordinator. To be assigned to a work crew is an earned privilege, but it also gives inmates benefits, such as learning work skills and the ability to reintegrate back into the community, he said.
"These are community service dollars working," Bielenberg said.
rliao@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 589-6941
Statesman Journal
February 18, 2007
Salem native Ken McPherson hates seeing graffiti in his community. As an inmate, he can do something about it.
"I'm glad to be out here doing something for the community," he said.
McPherson was a member of an inmate work crew checking for graffiti under the Center Street bridge in Salem recently. The effort is a result of a partnership between the Oregon Department of Corrections and Salem Police Department.
The work crews handle any graffiti reported on state and city-owned property, said Kim Nelson of the police department's Graffiti Abatement program. Interstate 5 sound walls, freeway overpasses, bridges -- all are concrete spaces usually tagged by spray paint and needing constant painting, she said. Nelson keeps a list of 15 to 20 most-targeted locations.
The program originally began three years ago, but has been on hold for the past few months, Nelson said. It was relaunched with inmate work crews out of the Santiam Correctional Institution.
When the program was at a standstill, the response time to clean up graffiti on Nelson's hot list was about two weeks, she said. Now the response time is down to a day or two. If graffiti reoccurs in the same spot, which often happens, the crews are available for touch-ups.
"For the community, it's an obvious benefit," Hodgin said. "It's costly for the city or anyone else to pay for it to have it done."
The crew's labor is a volunteer service to the city, said Dan Bielenberg, an inmate work program coordinator. To be assigned to a work crew is an earned privilege, but it also gives inmates benefits, such as learning work skills and the ability to reintegrate back into the community, he said.
"These are community service dollars working," Bielenberg said.
rliao@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 589-6941
Sunday, February 11, 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)