Letters to the Editor
Sept. 19, 2007

Affordable housing

I thought that Hood River had an ordinance regarding set-backs on property. I guess that I was wrong. I also thought that you had to have drainage from your roof land on your property.

What exactly is “common property”? Is it the property between houses or is it the property that is supposed to be set aside for ingress or egress?

I thought that the property included the house and land adjacent. It sounds like the new definition is that there is NO land other than that enclosed by the house included with the purchase.

There are some duplexes on May Street that have garages that are slanted, and so small that the only real use for them is either for a Morris Minor, or for storage. In no way should they be considered as real garages. Why is this allowed when generally a residence is required to have off-street parking?

Houses in Hood River have really changed. It is either a mansion or apartment-like areas.

I notice that there seem to be no restrictions relating to unbuildable land. In effect, no matter how unsuitable for building, building is allowed. Witness the houses along Serpentine and May Street.

I ask only for common sense when constructing housing. Allow some land for children and room for people to roam outside of their house.

Vote yes on M-49

I‘ve been following the Measure 37-Measure 49 debate closely over the past few months and as a community development student at Portland State I’m concerned with what seems to be an utter lack of community concern by the property rights activists. At what point does the community have rights?

Jon Laraway wrote a letter to the editor (Sept. 12) with some points against Measure 49. I agree with Mr. Laraway that some of the extra roads, power and water systems necessitated by developments will not be put in at taxpayer expense but most of the maintenance of these systems along with extra stress on schools, costs of busing students, plowing and maintaining roads and maintaining certain aspects of our fire services will be a burden on the taxpayers.

We all will see an increase in our property taxes to take care of maintaining this new infrastructure especially since, according to the county planning office, our road maintenance in the county has been funded primarily by timber sales, which we all know is a decreasing income stream.

Mr. Laraway points out the May/Frankton area is an area under vigorous development. Yes, this area is developing quickly but this area is part of a long-term city plan and it is within the urban growth boundary. The necessary infrastructure is prepared for the level of development in this area.

We have a high degree of livability in the Hood River Valley. We have a dense vibrant town center with local businesses. Surrounding town we have some of the most fertile farmland in the country and we have national forest land beyond the farms.

This structure is not an accident; it takes careful, long-term planning that Oregonians have a great reputation for. Anyone who has visited Houston, Phoenix or any suburb in California can tell you the appalling impacts of a lack of planning.

Let’s protect our unique community and intentional livability. Measure 49 will still allow one to three homes to Measure 37 claimants; possibly more. Let’s help the people we thought we were helping with Measure 37.

Let’s get these smaller developments done but let’s not let the greed of the other claimants harm our community. Please vote yes on 49 for the whole community.

Remember 9/11

Tuesday, Sept. 11, was the anniversary of the 9/11 attack on New York. I hope everybody that day stopped what they were doing for a moment to remember the people who lost their lives in that horrible attack that day.

I was watching TV that morning when I saw the attack on New York. I will never forget that day and what was happening to all those innocent people. They didn’t deserve to die like that and have their lives taken away from them so soon.

Issues of freedom

A recent The Dalles Chronicle has two wonderful examples of Big Government’s abuse of its citizens.

The confiscation of two pet deer justifiably brings outrage. A citizen saved an ailing deer he found by the roadside at great expense to himself. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife rules require that the citizen should have contacted their agency when the animal was found so it could be managed with our tax dollars. According to them, the animals belong in the wild and if they cannot handle the wild, they should be transferred to a licensed care facility. The heartache of the family who saved and cared for the deer does not matter. Big Brother knows best.

The plan to clean up the deserted and unsightly Broughton Mill site in the Columbia River Gorge, and build a beautiful resort that would provide jobs and enhance recreation is just too much for our governmental watch dogs. Obviously, these agencies lack compassion, vision and common sense.

Let’s remember that big government means less freedom. This is not a partisan issue. It is a “freedom” issue.