© 2002
The Nugget Newspaper
Sisters, Oregon
All rights reserved

Send us an email

Display Advertising

Letters, letters, letters
The Nugget welcomes contributions from its readers, which must include the writer's name, address and phone number. Letters to the Editor is an open forum for the community and contains unsolicited opinions not necessarily shared by the Editor. The Nugget reserves the right to edit, omit, respond or ask for a response to letters submitted to the Editor. Letters should be no longer than 300 words. Unpublished items are not acknowledged or returned. The deadline for all letters is noon Monday.

To the Editor:

As a city resident and senior at Sisters High School, I would like to comment on the subject of annexing the school district's property into the city on which to build the new high school. As part of my education, I have been taught the value of the democratic process.

Our community witnessed this process in action last year, when it contemplated a proposition to build a new school.

The pros and cons of building a new school, and whether it should be a middle or high school, were thoroughly examined. Following discussions with the community, the school board developed a fiscally responsible plan to build a new high school.

A bond motion was put before eligible voters, who voted to build the school. Since this issue was discussed and carried out democratically, no further discussion regarding whether to build a high school or middle school is necessary.

The present question concerns whether to annex the new school's property into the City of Sisters, as opposed to leaving it in the county. I believe that the property should be annexed for several reasons, the strongest being that it makes the most sense from a financial standpoint.

If the school is built on county property, there will be a delay in the building process. This could cause the interest from the bond to be used up, which might have otherwise been returned to taxpayers.

Lastly, the newly constructed sewer system has been built to accommodate the new school. If built on county property, additional costs of thousands of dollars for a septic system would come into play. Besides, septic systems tend to be harder on the environment. If built in the city, the high school would pay sewer fees, thus possibly reducing the amount each citizen would have to pay.

As a side note, SOAR recently received a $100,000 grant from the Bill Gates Foundation. However, this is contingent on the property being annexed. This would benefit the entire community.

I urge all voters to support this by voting yes on annexation.

Sincerely,

Jamie Cundiff

* * *

To the Editor:

Bravo (Eric Dolson) on your clear comments at the February 4 school board meeting. It was interesting to see Messrs. Swisher, Lasken, and Smith squirm and try to justify the need for a performing arts theatre under the guise of a 920 seat school auditorium.

You correctly tried to direct them away from reducing the cafeteria costs at the expense of the auditorium and ultimately at the expense of the students.

Comments from two board members to OK the 920 seats were: "for movies" (Glen Lasken) and "who knows what it might be used for over the next 100 years" (Jeff Smith).

It seems your comments to benefit students were not heard.

Our involvement is to urge a review and reevaluation of the real needs and costs.

It seems that a display of "mean spiritedness" occurred at 7 p.m., as the board meeting began. A letter was presented by a uniformed officer -- a letter prepared by Mr. Swisher at his office in mid afternoon -- about 300 yards from my residence.

Intimidation and embarrassment and misusing a police officer's time is both wrong and rude.

The annexation should occur for a needed middle school and SOAR. The voters should ask to have the $20.5 million apportioned for a new middle school, and to make improvements to the present high school and the elementary school -- thus probably eliminating the need for near term levies and tax increases.

This board needs to be more fiscally responsible by presenting the total cost comparisons for the project with an eye to being fiscally responsible.

The architects contend the high school was built with an eye to future expansion to 1200 students. Is that incorrect?

Mel Bryan

To the Editor:

Those of us who chose Tollgate subdivision as a place to live did so for a variety of reasons, one of which was the relative privacy offered by large lots and "commons" areas.

The upcoming second vote on a proposed bicycle and walking path is troubling because it provides a service to all at the expense of a few. The path would run on only one side of Lariat, but not along any side street or cul-de-sac.

I confess that I am one of the few who will lose extremely valued privacy, while enduring significantly increased foot and bicycle traffic in front of my home.

I feel that such a path would have been a super amenity had it been constructed when the subdivision was opened, but not only was this not done, no property was set aside for it to be constructed later.

The first vote had many in favor, but was voted down fairly convincingly. Perhaps some residents, like some of my neighbors, could see that the proposal benefits everyone at the expense of just a few. Perhaps the cost was a deterrent. This time around, no meeting or hearing was scheduled on this issue, which is why I am using this forum.

Neighbors, please, in the interest of fairness, vote "no" on this issue.

Respectfully,

Jim Anderson

To the Editor:

This February, a very long and complicated set of circumstances led to my sister having her foot amputated. Certainly a loss and devastation to be reckoned with.

I would like to thank the people of Sisters for all their kind wishes, offers of help, care and concern.

It has been very heart warming and I will be forever grateful.

But there is one thing I am very confused about. As far back as Biblical times we are warned sternly not to judge others. Now, we are not a family with much money or material wealth. We don't own a business, nor are any of us politically outspoken or active. Nor are we in the habit of standing in our own little glass houses and throwing stones of judgment at those around us.

So I fail to understand why certain people in our little community (and they know who they are) have taken it upon themselves to observe my family's situation and consequential problem and pass judgment on us and then pass that on to my daughter and myself.

It is a condemnation born of very limited and insufficient evidence on their part.

Since we, as a family, pose no threat to these people and they most certainly reside in their own glass houses, I can only assume that their judgments, opinions and attitudes are strictly motivated by narrow-minded bitterness, born of an inability to keep their own yards clean.

This tragedy has brought into our lives a whole new and difficult set of circumstances to deal with and help my sister live with. We do not have time or energy or heart to deal with small, mean, judgmental people.

Stephanie Matzen

To the Editor:

I was run over by an out of control snowboarder at Hoodoo on February 1. I broke my tibia, fibia, kneecap, and possibly tore my knee. I face a 9-12 month rehabilitation.

I have had wonderful dinners and desserts, flowers, and people baby-sitting my children and myself.

Camp Sherman is a wonderful community with lots of caring people. I just wanted to thank everyone for helping my family and I during this crisis. I wanted to especially thank my husband, Rick, for taking care of me and always being there when I need him.

Sincerely, Lori A. Kernutt

Back to front page