Sadly, a car departs

Sometime Monday night, April 23, my bright red 1941 Chevrolet Coupe was stolen from the parking lot of my muffler shop.

When I went to work on Tuesday morning and saw that it was gone, my first thought was that someone had borrowed it.

When I realized that wasn’t the case I reported it stolen and word got out into the community. The support I received that day made me realize that Hood River is a great place to live. I want to thank everyone that stopped by to commiserate over my loss and express shock that it could happen here. Truth is, it can happen anywhere, to anyone.

My car was found Tuesday night in rural Wasco County, four miles up a gravel road. It is a shell of what it was before it was stolen.

So, remember it from 15 years of Fourth of July parades and car cruises. I am ready to move on, and thanks to all my friends here in Hood River I will.

Mike Hannifan
Hood River

Taking or giving?

Land Use zoning — takings or givings?

The proponents of Measure 37 would have us all believe property rights were taken form them when their land was rezoned for farm use.

Farm property owners filing Measure 37 claims do not want certain facts known. The first is how Oregon taxpayers owning non-farm property have been subsidizing property taxes of farmland owners. This has been going on for over 30 years.

The second fact is just how little property taxes they have paid over this same period. The third fact is without the Farm Use designation they have benefited from, none of them could have afforded to operate a farm or orchard. They would not have had farms to pass on to their children.

Let me explain. All values and assessments are from the Hood River County Assessor’s office. Hood River County assesses all property, for tax purposes, at or below $15.115 per thousand. Farm Use zoning (FU) in the county has five categories, the highest being Orchard (#1) and the lowest being pasture or hay (#5). Ten acres of FU #1 orchard land in the central lower valley (Area 4) has a tax-assessed value of $37,280 or $3,728 per acre. Ten acres of FU #5 pasture land has a tax assessed value of $2,050 or $205 per acre. The property owner of the 10 acres of orchard land paid property taxes in 2006 of $563.49. The pasture land owner paid $30.23.

In 1974, the permitted use for these parcels was residential, quarter-acre lots. Today, residential assessed tax value is $13.17 per thousand. One acre of residential quarter-acre lot use is assessed, for tax purposes, at $106,000. 2006 taxes on 10 acres of Area 4 residential use land was $13,960.

Using today’s dollars, orchard land taxes since 1974 amounts to a total of $18,032 and pasture land of $968. Had the rural residential zoning not be changed to farm use, taxes on the 10 acres of orchard or pasture would have been $446,720.

Having Area 4 land zoned as farm use saved the orchardist $428,688 in taxes since 1974. The pasture owner saved a lot more.

Now I ask, was a zone change from rural residential to farm use a taking or a giving?

Gary J. Fields
Hood River

Be informed on 37

I sincerely hope that Rep. Patti Smith’s reported outrage at the purported lack of public testimony on legislation being crafted in Salem to clean up the mess created by a badly drafted Measure 37 will not keep her from moving forward with the difficult task that she and the other committee members very much need to conclude this month.

I have watched a seemingly endless parade of concerned citizens giving the committee their thoughts on reform since the early days of this session on the web broadcasts, and many of us have forwarded our ideas. Now it is high time that the representatives do their jobs and translate all of that into action.

The draft legislation is available for comment in writing and some limited available hearing time, but the details don’t reveal the complete roll-back of Measure 37 that reading this newspaper might lead you to believe is being contemplated. There is a fast track with transferable development rights allowing up to three residences per claim, and for those looking to get rich, a more deliberate valuation step sadly missing from the processing of claims to date is proposed, whereby an individual in Oregon can get up to 20 home sites approved if they have more than one parcel, which could be sited on 40 acres of high value farmland.

If their children have their own qualifying parcels, as is often the case with local orchard families, the family has 40 more potential acres in housing which will not generate ongoing income to speak of. That sounds a lot like subdivisions to me. If that level of development proceeds up the valley, we will be facing a rapid transition from a thriving ag economy to a marginal tourist one.

HRN readers also might erroneously conclude that the draft legislation sets a threshold of 20 percent loss before a claim for compensation or waived restrictions can move forward, but that is only for future laws enacted and not for any of the 30 years of laws being trumped by the glut of current claims. Without that, we hamstring our elected officials from doing anything new to address future concerns as they arise.

Get the facts, then either lobby for a little less loss of farmland or swallow hard and push Rep. Smith and the rest of the legislature to pass these proposed reforms that more than fairly compensate those who have made claims and provide a modicum of hope that the economy of this county will survive.

Scott Franke
Mt. Hood

Good work, Bush

Democrats are fond of saying George Bush and his cronies control oil prices in the USA. After much contemplation I am beginning to believe them. But as I travel around the country I’ve started to notice something about fuel prices.

In California fuel is around $3.70 a gallon. In Kansas the same fuel is $2.99. California is Democrat and Kansas is Republican.

The difference? Taxes. I have seen this pattern repeated in Delaware and Montana, New Jersey and Wyoming and many other states in this great country. George and his cronies may control oil prices, but the Democrats are bleeding us dry with taxes, as usual.

I also travel the world extensively on business for my engineering company. In Mexico City, I’ve paid $6.50 a gallon for fuel. In Quito, Ecuador, I’ve paid $7.90 a gallon. In Moscow, Russia, I’ve paid $8 a gallon. In the Cayman Islands I’ve paid $9.50 a gallon.

On the island of Rota, in the Marianas out in the Pacific, I’ve paid $12 a gallon for fuel. In The Philippines, Japan, China, Italy, Peru, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Panama and many other places I visited the fuel prices were similar.

According to the Democrats George lacks any leadership skills usable in the world arena, so it is very unlikely that he has anything to do with the fuel prices in these foreign countries. Now if that is the case I would sure like to offer the man my heartfelt thanks for “controlling” fuel prices in the U.S.A. He’s doing a great job!

Thanks for having my back, Mr. President. Keep up the good work.

Cliff Mansfield
Odell

‘Bugsy’ concerns

I remember seeing Bugsy Malone as a child and feeling uncomfortable watching it, not understanding why. After the first five minutes of the production Tuesday night in cooperation with Hood River Community Education, the same feeling came up in me and I wanted to get up and leave, but stayed to watch a little friend I had promised.

I took my 6-year-old daughter to see the play. She and I took a break in the middle so I could explain the mixed messages of violence and laughter. The entire play displayed innocent, extremely talented, dedicated first through third grade children as gangsters and show girls.

Why was it so disturbing to me and perhaps others? Because the children had musical talent that was mixed with portraying REAL world disturbing issues: gang violence, gender inequality, dishonesty, disrespect and promiscuity with lines like, “you two-timing jerk,” and singing as a dance hall girl, “My name is Talullah. I try to leave a reputation behind so if you need me, you’ll know where to find me.”

Of course, “Bugsy Malone” was the adored gang leader surrounded by many young girls. The line by Tallulah, “He is smart and good-looking,” was followed by the demand, “Talullah, fix him a drink.” Yes, young children were sitting at a table together pretending to drink alcohol, so it seemed.

And we as concerned parents and community members wonder why we have a problem with sexual violence and substance abuse?

If we as adults don’t discern what we are showing our children, and in this case actually promoting them to memorize lines and act out; teaching them to laugh at violence, or that being a show girl is cool; it is funny to talk disrespectfully, and gun violence is entertainment; we are treating violence and gender inequality as accepted norms and if it is accepted, it is hard to protect our children, and eventually their children.

With all the wonderful scripts with messages that teach respect, history, love and integrity, why was “Bugsy Malone” the one play of the year that Rebekah Stone Meyer chose to demonstrate young local talent?

Children, your voices were beautiful and your acting was well done. I do wonder what it was like for you to play these grown-up, unhealthy roles? I hope you have someone to talk with.

I would like to recommend that if we are exposing children to violence and mixed messages, it would be beneficial to have the issues addressed in a post show discussion.

Lori Buchanan
Hood River

37 protects rights

Most of us live in the real world — at least part of the time! So, those who think that farmers can be forced to continue farming for its scenic value alone are living in a dream world.

In the real world most farmers farm for one reason — to make a satisfactory financial return for capital and labor. Just as in any business, some succeed, some don’t. Nobody farms just to protect the scenic beauty for their neighbors. Few can afford the luxury of owning land without regard to financial return, be it short- or long-term.

When a farm can no longer provide its owner with the financial return desired, adjustments must be made. Less productive parts may be sold, farming practices may be altered to increase efficiency, and as a last resort all lands will be for sale to the highest bidder, whoever that may be: another farmer, a developer, or neighbor who enjoys the scenic view. That is the American way. Arbitrary zoning cannot change that basic principle. It can only affect the market value by its restrictions on use.

The passage of Measure 37 restored individual rights of property owners to sell and/or build on their land as they desire. If land use zoning reduces property values or restricts building rights, or other use by the owner, justifiable compensation should be paid for that lost value by those units of government enacting the land use changes.

Land use laws may designate agricultural zones, but they can never force it to be farmed unless it is financially profitable for the operator.

Allen E. Moore
Hood River

Good news

I read recently in a national news magazine the statement: “Violence has been in the decline over long stretches of history, and today we are probably living in the most peaceful moment of our species’ time on Earth.”

Say what?! In the last century we have seen a succession of long and bloody wars decimate every continent but ours. How could things be getting more peaceful?

The author, Harvard historian Steven Pinker (New Republic, March 19), cites too-often overlooked and under-reported trends. The first is that the proportion of the world’s population killed each year by war has dropped precipitously in the last few centuries — despite the Holocaust, all our bloody wars, and the millions of genocide victims. Fewer died in the wars of earlier centuries, but then there were far fewer people on our planet. This accounts for the downward trend in war deaths over the years.

What I found equally fascinating is the author’s claims that even acts of cruelty declined significantly, acts such as human sacrifice, slavery, mass torture, execution for simple misdemeanors, mutilation as routine punishment, even killing as public entertainment. All these were “unexceptionable features of life” in the past. “But today they are rare … in the West, far less common … elsewhere, concealed when they do occur, and widely condemned when brought to light.”

As a historian, Pinker suggests a number of possible causes: the rise of the nation state and the rule of law, the growing conviction that human life is not cheap, and a world shrunk by mass media.

But Pinker’s explanation for a “kinder and gentler” world that I find most compelling is his observation that “over the millennia, people’s moral circles have expanded to encompass larger and larger polities: the clan, the tribe, the nation, both sexes, other races and even animals.” In other words, our growing empathy and compassion has made it increasingly difficult to see others as different from ourselves and to treat them inhumanely.

For those of us (myself included) tempted to over-focus on the daily media’s offerings of violence and killing, this has to be good news!

David C. Duncombe
White Salmon

Praise for ‘Bugsy’

I am writing in support of the local children’s production of “Bugsy Malone” (performances now through May 12 at the Bowe Theatre). While gangsters and molls are not the usual fare of children’s productions this light-hearted spoof has given many local children a chance to try out their talents on stage through the inclusive casting of Mrs. Rebecca Meyer.

While many other children are at home sitting and watching hours of graphic violence on their televisions, these children have been learning to sing, dance, act and work as a team.

This is a play and children remember how to play. They also know the difference between a costume and a lifestyle! They are to be congratulated for their efforts, even if some disagree with the subject of the show. We encourage everyone to see it and judge for themselves.

Julie Raefield-Gobbo
Hood River

Rights for the legal

After seeing the protesters at Hood River’s (Overlook) Memorial fountain on May 1, I tried to put myself in their shoes … but I just can’t … you see, I would never go to another country expecting to be received as an equal or expect to be eligible for financial assistance from that country’s government, and I most certainly would not wave my country’s flag at the same time that I am demanding to be treated as an equal of another country.

It blows my mind to see this here, and I can’t for the life of me understand why anyone is disgruntled that America is deporting ILLEGAL immigrants, well … it’s because they are ILLEGALS, they are here ILLEGALLY. I’m sorry, but it drives me nuts to see anyone standing at protest, waving another country’s flag here in America, if they love that country so much why are they here?

Wouldn’t it make more sense for them to go back to the country whose flag they fly, stand on their street corners protesting whatever it is that makes them leave, and make their own country better?

I don’t have any problems with ANYONE being here in America, but you are expected to be here legally, and if you’re going to be here, love and respect HERE first, do whatever it takes to become an American citizen, THEN stand on the streets voicing your opinion on what would make America a better place.