Goodbye, Charlie!

What if they gave a going away party and no one came. Including the guest of honor. I considered, seriously, if Mr. Grant would appear at his send off last week at City Hall. Maybe he'd just forget or have to take the young one to swimming lessons, both regular excuses for missing meetings in the past. Better yet, he might have chosen to just "quit" like he did when he lost his re-election campaign. He just walked out. The end.

Well, stop the speculation....if you don't already know, he actually made it to this meeting, with the Judge and kid in tow. On his way out the door he was still making promises, "I'll send you that stuff you asked for, Kathy!" (Want to place bets that he'll go two-for-two and actually follow through on that promise? Thought not.)

Thanks for the memories, Charles.

Apolgies for my smart mouth........

I understand that some people were unhappy with a blog post I made in early December saying that I'd told co-workers I had spit in the Councilors' coffee.

Understandably so. While I made it pretty clear that it was not true, I should never have said it at all.

I'm known for my smart mouth and sarcastic sense of humor, but I think this crossed the line even for me. Whether or not the incident actually happened, it was wrong to post it here.

I apologize and, yes, I intend to make apologies to each of the Councilors, as well. If I offended readers here, I apologize for that, too.

Smiling!

I haven't smiled this much in a long time (election day, maybe??)! I just returned from seeing Pat Martyn and Randy Peterson sworn in and I smiled all the way home.

Good to see many of you in the audience as well as many of Randy and Pat's friends and family members. It was nice, too, to see some future voters in the audience. I'm hoping high school seniors who are attending these meetings for class will learn something good about the political process and be ready to lead St. Helens in the years to come.

Wonder if you can smile while you sleep??

New year, new council!

Even though Charles walked out on his duties to the council right after losing the election, it hasn't really felt like a "new council." Until now. Tomorrow night, Patrick Martyn will be sworn in to fill the position Charles vacated so abruptly.

I plan to be in the audience because this is something I worked hard for and care a great deal about. Not only will we have a new perspective (and, likely, much more participation) from Pat, but we'll have a voice of reason rather than one of "agree to get along" politics. It's a great day in St. Helens!

Also set to take the oath is Mayor Peterson, proving that people in this town recognize that there's more important to the Mayor's job than just making appearances around town.

Is it appropriate to stand up and cheer when someone takes the oath? I guess I'll find out. =)

The "other" Sally

From Sally C. 12/14/08

I just happened to have read a blogspot called recall 2008-9. It was written by a part time employee of the City of St. Helens. It appears that she loves how Mayor Peterson conducts himself and hates the present City Council. I don't know her, but it is apparent that she was heavily involved in the attempt to recall Doug Morton and Phil Barlow. In her blog she makes nasty personal attacks on the people that she works for. Bill mentioned to me that she even wore a recall button when she went to work. I can understand the concept of free expression, but I think that this person's free expression borders on outright insubordination. This alone should be a good reason to dismiss her. I am curious as to why she seems to like the Mayor as much as she does. Our Mayor is never around when he is needed, he even misses City Council meetings. I wonder what sort of ties exist? Is she related, are there friends or are there finances involved?

I personally think that St. Helens has been one of the most corrupt and self serving communities around, and it was only in the last two years that the present City Council has made an attempt to clean things up. Is this person involved with the old City Council and is she financially benefiting from some of the past corruption that used to occur?

People's memories may be short, but I still remember when Mayor Randy Sabotaged the Fire Rescue boat and because of high placed friends, was promoted instead of disciplined. I also remember how the Mayor and all his friends got cell towers, and bill board sites. Only the "in people" were given this opportunity. Does anyone remember the sale of land by the river that belonged to the Mayor and former police chief. The Mayor argued the year before that it was assessed too high, and asked that his property tax be reduced. He said that it could not be built on, was subject to flooding, and was not large enough to do anything of value.

He managed to get the assessment lowered to $36,980. Imagine everyone's surprise when he sold it the very next year for $385,000 to the City of St. Helens. Nice profit, and just one of many "Good Old Boy" happenings. Do you recall when all electrical work was given to the Mayors business, all collections were made through a Councilman's collection agency, and all the insurance went to a Council Person's insurance agency? These people ran for government positions because they could find ways in which government would benefit them personally. St. Helens is a growing community, and deserves something better than a bunch of drinking buddies running it for their own benefit.

The voters of our community finally managed to enact a change, and rid the city of most of these "close friends." After two years of clean government, a number of very wealthy and well connected people seem to want to get the new councilors recalled. Now why is this the case?

I read the recall blog, and I wonder about this part time employee blogger. Why is she so defiant and insubordinate? I know that the economy is turning bad and that cuts need to be made. I think that it might be to everyone's best interests if she was one of the people that they would consider cutting. I think that the existing Councilors are just too nice. This person, through her actions is causing problems for the City and with the publics perception of the City. Getting rid of this person would save the City embarrassment, money, and create a much more healthy working environment for everyone concerned.

from the ever-amazing St. Helens Update

PS, I'm thinking of forwarding this to Mayor Peterson and asking if my bonus checks are lost in the mail or something. Anyone know who the heck Sally C is? I just wanted to congratulate her for getting all her facts straight.

Good point

A City employee told me yesterday that he/she had overheard one of the managers making inquiries about purchasing a boat for Sand Island trips this summer. He/she was concerned that the City would be spending money on a boat when it's in financial despair. Good point.

I'm sure there will be justifications....it comes from Tourism money is the one that quickly comes to mind. The Arts & Cultural Commission just lost $12,000 of their funding (general fund) due to budget cuts. How is Tourism funded?

Thanks due

Thanks are due to Chad Olsen, City Administrator in St. Helens, for his continued efforts to find solutions to the budget crisis.

Over several weeks of council indecision, Olsen presented ideas and made suggestions. The three options he brought to the table at Wednesday's special work session finally "took" and the council agreed by consensus to use one of them as a first step to bringing the budget into balance.

The chamber was nearly full with visitors, several of them employees. The agreed upon path avoids any immediate staff layoffs (for weeks, at least four people have been concerned about losing their jobs by the end of the year) and calls for "everything on the table" when the budget committee convenes in January to start work on the FY 2009-10 budget.

The decision was a good one and the work ahead will be difficult, but I don't think we'd have gotten to this point (finally) without Chad's efforts.

So, thank you, Chad.

So, the City Administrator had a meeting with the union represented employees today to discuss the City's financial situation. Somehow, between the Tuesday work session and today's meeting with employees, things have changed again.

Several of us left the Tuesday work session believing the decision had been made to accept all cuts put on the table by the departments a couple of weeks back in work session, except for the cuts to personnel in the Police Dept.

In today's meeting, employees were told that everything is back on the table. I understand that to mean staff, too. And, not just PD staff.

Is there no communication in this place? And, how long will employees be left hanging out to dry? What happened between Tuesday afternoon and Thursday afternoon? And, where did it happen? Behind closed doors?

No one seems to know the answers, but the decision to convene a special Council work session on Wednesday, December 10, at 4:00 p.m. leads some of us to believe it could be important to be in attendance. Maybe a show of faces--employees and citizens--will get these guys off the dime. Time for some decisions.

I suggest we all be there if we can. Pet projects (whine, whine, I know) need to be set aside and the good of the City as a whole needs to take precidence. Essential staff is just that: essential.

Maybe they should just "can" the Judge since earlier this year they seemed to think they could do her job better (and less expensively) than she does. And, maybe they can terminate some of the more frivolous staff positions while they're at it.

Maybe we just need a big, bad case of employee flu to see just how well the City runs without staff. It's a fair bet that SH would do better without three of the existing councilmen than wihtout existing staff. (I'd say four of the councilmen but Charles Grant has just flown the coop--sore loser or did he just never care?? Nice time to bail, Chas.)

One thing, for sure, I'm very curious as to what the delay is. They seem to all have acknowledged on Tuesday that they were finally aware there is a problem with the budget; how long do they think they can delay making some decisions?

And, lastly, just to stick a thorn in the sides of the three "pet project boys" I am sorely tempted to transcribe the minutes of the May 27 joint meeting between the City Council and the Budget Committee where Marilyn Peterson clearly stated the $1.2 million issue, and some Budget Committee members clearly indicated their understanding of the issues and asked the council to step up.

Maybe I'll send copies of the transcribed joint meeting minutes to Locke, Barlow, and Morten, and for good measure, to the Spotlight as well. Enough people in St. Helens will be struggling this holiday season, why shouldn't these guys feel a little discomfort as well?

Take your fingers out of your ears, Councilors!

I continue to be amazed that I keep hearing some of the councilors talk about not knowing anything about the potential budget woes before Marilyn Peterson told them last work session. As late as yesterday's work session, Phil still acted as if it was some huge conspiracy....that everyone knew about the budget issues except him...like people kept the information from him. I guess have to forgive them for being so upset over the recall statements.......if you can believe them, they actually didn't know!

I'm confused as to how that is possible. Marilyn told admin staff last Spring. Chad seems to think it was discussed with councilors last spring, and yet they are still whining about not knowing. Hence the title of this post.

I thought several comments were entertaining in yesterday's work session. Phil said he felt he was being "screwed" and called it a "big screw." I think he was referring to the fact that he'd not been told about the budget problems and had to read about them in the paper. (Assume he's referring to the quotes from Marilyn Peterson in the paper about the urgent need to address the budget shortfall. I think that indicates he can read, so why didn't he read his materials last Spring?)

Phil was also pretty direct, too, about saying staff needs to be cut. I wanted to jump up and suggest he and the others cut their self-awarded pay increases, work session snacks, and any other perks they've got before he said another word about cutting staff. But, I limited my show of disgust to a few eye rolls.

Fortunately, the way things played out, there will be cuts to expenses but not to staff this time around. However, it was made clear....well, let's say that I heard it: come next budget cycle (for fiscal year 2009-2010) everything is on the table. That means staff, too. The current plan is to let attrition work its wonders, but at least one manager at City Hall says that staff cuts were promised, even if it wasn't actually said in yesterday's meeting.

On a silly note, I made coffee this afternoon for the council meeting tonight and told the folks I work with that I spit in it. No one believed me, of course, but one person actually gave me a high-five for it and said it was about time! And, no, I didn't really do it. These guys have enough problems without my spit in their coffee!!

You tell 'em, Marilyn! But, don't expect that they will listen or hear....

St. Helens faces budget crunch

City's finance director tells council 'act now' or risk running out of cash reserves
By Kelly Moyer

The South County Spotlight, Nov 26, 2008, Updated Nov 26, 2008

Faced with expenditures that outweigh revenues by roughly $1.2 million a year, the city of St. Helens is rapidly blowing through its cash reserves.
Now the City Council must decide whether they want to cut $500,000 from the budget today to avoid major cuts in the future.

“Every month that goes by is going to make it even worse,” says St. Helens Finance Director Marilyn Peterson of the city’s increasingly critical financial situation. “The city needs to act now or we will have spent through all our cash reserves by 2010.”

City councilors aren’t so convinced. Last month they asked the city’s department heads to put together a scenario of what cuts they would need to make to reduce the city’s expenditures by 10 percent.

Last week, those department heads presented some very bleak scenarios to the council.
If the total budgetary cuts were to equal 10 percent, nearly $500,000, the city would likely have to cut $268,506 from the police department; $94,220 from city administration; $73,046 from the library; and $60,000 from the park department.
That’s equivalent to four police positions, one administrative position and one part-time library position.

“If they wait until next year, they’re going to have to cut $1.2 million,” Peterson says. “And they would lose numerous positions. The cuts, if they wait, are going to be significant.”

In the 10 percent reduction scenarios presented to council on Wednesday, Nov. 19, the city’s department heads tried to eliminate as much as they could before chopping positions. For instance, the police chief proposed cutting nearly $20,000 in materials, including $3,409.11 in gasoline and $2330.90 in equipment expenses, but still put four positions on the chopping block and said he would reduce overtime by $7,000.

The city administrators proposed doing away with the councilors’ pay, which would save $35,000, cutting the public art expense for a savings of $12,000 and not pursuing an urban renewal district, which would save $15,000. Even with those cuts, they would still need to cut a position (in this scenario, the economic development director) to meet the 10 percent reduction.

“I think they’ll need to pick and choose,” says Peterson. “They have safety issues and central services to consider, so they may choose to look at nonessential services like the library and parks.”

Skip Baker, the city’s head of economic development, says he thinks councilors may not have understood the full extent of the problem until after they adopted this year’s budget.

“There are a lot of different ways to be told you need to make cuts,” Baker says. “The council didn’t really understand how much they needed to adjust the budget until after it passed. That’s not to say that (Peterson) isn’t doing her job, because she is doing a good job, it’s just that not everything comes across in layman’s language sometimes.”

After the city’s manager, Chad Olsen, grasped the full extent of St. Helen’s financial troubles, Baker says, he sat down with Peterson to create a more understandable picture for the council. Last month, the mayor asked department heads to put together the 10 percent reduction scenarios to see what type of impact that might have on people and materials.

Baker says the situation hasn’t necessarily reached critical status yet, but agrees with Peterson that the city may be in for rough times if the council doesn’t act now.
“Once you run out of reserves you don’t have the ability to handle emergencies,” Baker says. “So you either make cuts now or you wait two years and have to make bigger cuts.”

Councilors said last week that they need more time to analyze the department heads’ scenarios and to explore other options, including looking at ways to increase the city’s revenues to better balance the financial outlook.

However, most city administrators, including Baker and Peterson are optimistic that the situation will improve in the next year or two.

“Clearly the problem is due to the economy,” Baker says. “Two years ago we weren’t going through these types of negative (numbers). We began to lose money last year as the economy slowed down. When interest rates went down we made less money from our interest, and as energy use goes down we make less money from our franchise fees.”
Peterson agrees.

“I don’t see anything that points to this getting any better,” she says of the city’s financial future. “In fact, this may get even uglier. The council should have made these decisions back in May. It’s only getting worse, so the faster they make these cuts, the easier it will be.”

Copyright 2008 Pamplin Media Group, 6605 S.E. Lake Road, Portland, OR 97222 • 503-226-6397

The City with the healthy budget

"Healthy." I think that's the word Barlow used to describe the City's fiscal situation a few weeks ago. Last night at the Council's evening work session, Finance Director Marilyn Peterson once again told the council the same news she'd given them earlier this year. The City will be $1.2 million into the reserve funds by June 2009 and, without drastic changes, could be bankrupt by June 2010.

Currently each department has been asked to suggest ways to cut 10% from their budgets and define how that would affect services to the public.

At last night's meeting only Police Chief Steve Salle' put staff on the line. His $2.8 million budget is personnel-heavy; all but about $400,000 is personnel, in fact. So, a 10% cut for the PD means staff. He unwillingly offered up four positions and then (very well, I thought) explained the difficulties the department would face without these positions, and how it would drastically affect services.

Parks, the Library, and administration made their suggestions and there was little discussion, with the council deciding to consider their options and make some decisions at their next work session (December 2 at 1:00 pm in Council Chambers).

Two interesting comments: one from Barlow, which I heard, and one from Morten which was voiced after I left so I don't know the exact context. Barlow said he thought since the PD was "willing" to give up four positions, the rest of the departments should do the same. First, Chief Salle' was not WILLING, nor do I think the four people affected by this would be willing. Second, I wanted to ask him if he was willing to give up his self-awarded stipend as a show of good faith!

Morten apparently said something along the lines of how he thought it was important to continue to scheduled park projects (specifically, the Columbia View Park improvements and beautification efforts just underway). The way I heard it was that he was suggesting park projects should continue even though the PD was losing a patrolman, both code enforcement officers, and a clerk. Again, I'm curious to know whether or not he intends to cut his stipend before he cuts jobs OR continues park improvements.

Way to go, boys.

The budget discussion is worrisome no matter how you view it. With Boise's closures, the City is in an even more difficult situation. At least two of the councilors last night indicated that Marilyn Peterson's information about a $1.2 million deficit was news to them, despite the fact that she said it in the joint Council-Budget Committee meeting last Spring (it's on tape) and provided the information to them in writing at some point earlier this year.

THIS is why Sally's recall petitions said the city could be in trouble financially. We heard it, we read it, where were the councilors?

Something else to ponder, I think, is the reaction all of this will get from the public, if and when the council or city decides to address it in a very public way. Granted, their meetings are public. But, will there be a public forum? Will there be information in the newspapers? Will the public be asked their opinions? Or, will the council simply make their decisions and forego public input? Who knows?

Several of us were talking at work today about the opportunity the council has here to be proactive: make the situation very public and get people involved; ask the public what they think the city should do to stay on an even keel financially. I'll be anxious to see what they do.

One thing is certain: there will be no easy decisions. Even among City staff that I've spoken with, there is great dissension. One PD staffer actually said, "close the library completely." A public works fellow thinks the PD gets everything because they claim to be "essential," which he reads as "better than everyone else." A court employee says we can't allow the PD to be cut. Do you see where I'm going here?

It's a no-brainer that something has to go and it's just as clear that most people choose based on their own biases. Not a surprise, but not very conducive to mutual agreement.

I work with the Arts & Cultural Commission and support them, but I can see that the $15,000 that was allotted them this year is something that can be easily and wisely cut from the general fund expenses. I am a strong supporter of libraries, books, reading, reading programs, etc., but yes, I think the Library could and should go back to being open just six days a week if that will help the general fund. And, as much as I support the parks and know that they work on a shoestring as it is, I think any planned projects that are "beautification" only need to be set aside.

And, yes, I think the PD is "essential" and libraries, parks, and art are not. I don't always practice what I preach, but I'm a firm believer in "needs" over "wants." Cut whatever you have too, INCLUDING COUNCILOR SALARIES, but don't cut the PD staff in favor of the councilors pet projects.

Councilor Chronicles and other ramblings

The City's Tourism Commission recently voted to fund the private, non-profit St. Helens Foundation's event advertising. The Foundation is not an arm of the City of St. Helens. Is this ethical? Legal? And, oh gosh. Can we even guess which councilor is on that commission and suggested that idea??

Possibly the same councilor who stores Foundation items at City Hall (the big movie screen from Friday night movies, equipment, tables, supplies and road signs...road signs which, by the way, clearly say they belong to the SHPD...maybe when they aren't in use by this councilor?).

It's likely the same councilor who recently helped empty an old building downtown to get it ready to host St. Helens Foundation Halloween events. Sadly, the carpet remnants and such he removed from the building ended up in City Hall storage. Free, I'm sure.

Now the ramblings...

We're in the throes of cutting back at City Hall, looking for ways to save money. (Remember when Barlow and Morten assured us we had no budgetary concerns?) Each department has been asked to suggest ways to cut 10% from their existing budget and define how those cuts might affect them and the services they offer.

Among my suggestions, which I can assume will not be very well accepted:

1. Cut councilors salaries (and this one had better happen before any staff is cut)
2. Charge the St. Helens Foundation rental fees
3. Cut out councilor snacks at work session meetings
4. Cut the Gazette ego-letter down to four pages
5. Put the Parks Department back together with Public Works to cut the cost of running the extra building, and maintenance, and communication/internet fees

Careful, I'm on a roll. Why don't we ask the councilors to give up the office which they rarely use, moving them to a space upstairs so that their office (downstairs) could be used for the cramped admin, building, planning staff in the front office. Customer service suffers because there's not enough counter space.

And, lastly, the City has, at the suggestion of its attorney, decided to revise wording on the Certificates of Insurance required with park use applications for groups of 50 or more persons. It is now required that the certificate clearly state that the City of St. Helens is an "additional insured" and that it name the date and place of the event for which the coverage is provided. I'm looking forward to seeing compliance from the St. Helens Foundation and its leaders.

But, as with all this stuff, I'm not holding my breath!

In case you missed it in the Spotlight 11-12-08

Sally Gump is taking a vacation.

And after fighting what seems to be two imaginary lawsuits against her for the past four months, a break is probably in order.

“You know, I’m happy to take two months off,” Gump says. “I’ve decided I’m not going to screw up my holidays because of those two. … But I’ll be back. I’m going to continue the recall effort.”

The St. Helens mother and local political activist has made news headlines over the past several months — first for her efforts to recall two St. Helens city councilors and then for the defamation suit those two councilors filed against her.

But after hiring an attorney to fight the libel suits, Gump learned last month that city councilors Doug Morten and Phil Barlow had never really sued her.

According to Columbia County Circuit Judge Steven B. Reed, until the two men’s attorney, James Huffman, served Gump the proper paperwork, there were no lawsuits.

The judge said Oct. 27 that Barlow had until Nov. 3 to serve Gump the correct paperwork and Morten had until Nov. 4.

When those deadlines came and went, Gump realized she wouldn’t have to fend off libel suits. She and her attorney, Michael Sheehan, believe the councilors filed the suits to scare people away from Gump’s recall efforts.

“People were really scared,” Gump said Monday, nearly a week after Barlow and Morten missed the filing deadlines. “Now I have more people willing to help me, willing to get rid of the bad seeds. People here want city people to work for them and not for themselves and their own agendas.”

Because the two men didn’t follow up on their lawsuits, Reed had no jurisdiction to rule on Gump’s attorney’s motion to dismiss the suits, which meant he also couldn’t award attorney’s fees to Gump.

As it turns out, Sheehan has said he won’t charge Gump for his services.

“I’m grateful he didn’t charge me,” Gump said. “I would be really (angry) if I’d had to pay for this.”

One thing that did upset Gump was the fact that Morten, who was unsuccessful in his recent bid against incumbent St. Helens Mayor Randy Peterson, stopped at the Gumps’ house during his campaign stops.

When Gump asked him about the defamation lawsuit, she says Morten told her “It was out of his hands.”

“He said Mr. Barlow was going to proceed with his suit, but then it never happened,” Gump said. “To me it was like, ‘Well, we’ll wait and see what happens, but then nothing happened.”

Doug Morten and attorney James Huffman did not return calls by The Spotlight’s deadline, and Phil Barlow could not be reached in time to comment on this story.

[by Kelly Moyer]

This, I realize in hindsight, is why Sally was a good Chief Petitioner for the recall. Not only did she do an amazing job of carrying the recall as far as she did, she also always maintained her dignity and integrity, and still does. Unlike Sally, I'd have my attorney drawing up papers to sue them for my attorney fees if the CP shoes were on my feet. I'd be dragged right down there with the bozos.

If she takes on the recalls again in January, I'm with her.

Hiatus?

Sally's taking back her life for the next couple of months and I'm inclined to do the same. I'll post as often as the news is there and you're all welcome to post anytime as well, but there won't be daily posts for the next couple of months.

Meantime, take this pat on the back: Randy was re-elected and Pat Martyn joins the council in January. The recall councilors showed their true colors and we maintained our integrity (even when they gave us repeated reasons to stoop to their level). We've learned a lot and made some new friends, and we've kept Doug in his place for another couple of years. We'll let you know when the victory party is.

In the meantime, be well and check back now and then. And, don't forget to be involved--let them know we continue to watch and that we expect responsible representation.

A happy high-five and THANK YOU!

All they ever really wanted.

As we fully expected, of course, the deadline for Doug and Phil to serve Sally properly and get on with the suits has passed. No service, no suits, no day in court. No opportunity for people to see their councilors defend themselves in public. And, if I remember correctly, that's all they ever wanted. At least they said that was all they really wanted.

By the way, no further word yet on the extra 28 days that Judge Reed supposedly gave Huffman to finish the case. We'll keep you posted.

Wonder if April will testify to that?

The news April gave me is this. She was told by Judge Reed that he is extending their filing on me for another 28 days. She's going to go find out what it's about. I'll call Mike tomorrow after work. I'm not worried. Morten told April that they only filed it to scare me and have me fold in. They didn't think I was smart enough.

from an email from Sally

I'm lost for a title for this one .......... you choose!

I've been hesitant to post this, because it feels a bit like voyerism. But, the race is won and I'm still scratching my head over this. It was the only comment posted on his website, it's seven years old, and it sounds kind of, uh, personal. Why did he post it on his campaign website? Note that even "Cindy" suggests these comments should be shared "quietly." Wonder if she knows it's been posted for the world to see?

6/15/01

Mort,

The program at the luncheon seemed so scripted that I didn’t find an appropriate moment to interrupt, then it was too late. I really felt badly in that I did prepare remarks that I think the staff should have heard from an arts person. But to follow the humorous and raucous tribute of the Troika and Slick was too much for this serious stuff. Perhaps it is better to share these thoughts quietly.

I intended to start by asking if any one knew of Ansel Adams or Orson Welles’ Citizen Kane. And then Hockney, which I would suspect few would recognize, yet many may have seen the student work inspired by him. I think Hockney provides the perfect paradigm to describe your career in arts education and athletics.

I would have explained to everyone that Hockney investigated Picasso’s pictorial ideas known as cubism. Picasso essentially attacked Renaissance concepts of space, “looking through the window” school of realism. Cubism is about seeing from multiple perspectives, the way in which our eyes take in multiple and shifting view. Hockney calls this the “flicker and scanning of binocular vision,” which with the camera can capture space, time, and movement.

Some may see the students’ photo collages as lightweight investigations or fanciful trickery. Yes, some may appear that way, bug Hockney affirms that “vision is like hearing, it is selective, you decide what’s important.” To me this is the paradigm that represents what you have brought to students over 31 years—-the ability to see from multiple perspectives and to capture space, time, and movement. You have inspired, befriended, taught almost 5000 students in ceramics, graphic design, photography, and year book. (My first inept calculations produced the modest number of 29,000 – glad I’m not teaching math. After 31 years it probably seems the number could be that large).

As a Lincoln parent I can say with great appreciation that you have inspired my son in ways that will affect him the rest of his life. You have opened his mind to the wonders of photography, but you have also created awareness about life skills such as team work, organization, cooperation no matter what direction he takes in life.

As a student teacher at Lincoln 13 years ago, I had the good fortune to work with an outstanding department—Crosier, Speros, and Morten. You all are part of a generation of arts teachers who passionately believe that the arts make a difference in the lives of their students; that content knowledge gives shape to vision and creates meaning; and that the experience of studio work can build self esteem and appreciation of others.

As a colleague these past 12 years, you have always been ready with a smile and a pat on the back. You are the calming force in our sometimes dysfunctional department. I say dysfunctional only in that we are a small department of both visual and performing arts and sometimes get stretched to the point of fragmentation. You Mort have always seemed to be the voice of reason.

An finally a tribute I heard from a senior humanities student as our class discussed your retirement. She said “Mort taught me to see.” Some of our faculty may think this is a small thing, but those of us in the arts know this is a wonderful tribute and a gift that all arts teachers should hope to impart to their students.

Man Ray in his book on modern photography (1957) said: “Of course there will always be those who look only at technique, who ask ‘how?’ while others of a more curious nature will ask ‘why?’ Personally I have always preferred inspiration to information.” You Doug have been both informational and inspirational as a teacher, a colleague, and a friend to many of us at Lincoln! Thank you and congratulations on your retirement!

Most Sincerely,

Cindy

ST HELENS RE-ELECTS RANDY AND OUSTS CHARLES FOR PAT!

YAHOOOOOO!!!

St. Helens voters got at least two things right! Congratulations to Randy Peterson and Pat Martyn!

I'd have posted sooner but I've been on the phone doing the "we won, we won" dance with friends!

BY THE WAY, the boyz didn't refile against Sally. She's catching up on sleep and her personal life until January and will make new recall announcements then!

I'm calling them out!

Isn't that what you say when you want some one to show up for a fight?!

I'm calling out Doug and Phil--bring it. If you want your day in court, your chance to "tell your side of the story," then by all means, do it. Amend your court papers, file properly, serve the malicious Ms. Gump and let's get on with it.

I, for one, am dying to hear YOUR side of the story.

I'll hold my breath until Tuesday, November 4th at 5:00 p.m., when your papers are due in court, and then I'll just have to assume that you couldn't come up with any facts to dispute the recall statements or just weren't interested in putting any effort behind your words. Worst of all, guys, I'll know this was a game. So will all of your constituents.

So, prove me wrong. St. Helens is waiting.

To the Publisher and Editor of The Chronicle

Please discontinue my subscription to your paper.

When I moved to this area four years ago, I started a subscription to the paper I considered “local” to my home in Columbia City. Yours. In those four years, I’ve read the paper cover to cover, week after week, and while picking up some bits and pieces of the news, I’ve primarily used the paper as a piece to practice my proofreading and spell-checking. (Did you know there’s a feature on computers these days that does much of that for you??)

During the past three months I’ve been heavily involved in the recall effort against St. Helens City Councilors Doug Morten and Phil Barlow, as have many residents of the St. Helens area—whether they were for or against the issue.

Your paper was given the first opportunity to run with the story, courtesy of Sally Gump’s personal friendship with one of your writers. Imagine my dismay and confusion to find that the South County Spotlight broke the story, and then, in form with a “news” paper, followed it throughout. This, despite repeated efforts to offer information first to your staff.

There are two things that should have triggered my decision to cancel my subscription, early on:

First, the St. Helens City Council's decision to switch back to the Chronicle as their paper of record after the South County Spotlight ran an interview with Mayor Randy Peterson in which he criticized the actions and behavior of the current council. This article was followed shortly afterward with an interview with Councilor Doug Morten. Even reporting, I think. The Council, however, at the urging of Councilor Phil Barlow, voted to change paper of record almost immediately following the interview with Peterson.

That decision might have been a simple change of heart among councilors, perhaps even to bring the paper of record distinction back to the town paper, IF the Chronicle had even once printed a story after that time that was not pro-council. It left many of us at City Hall shaking our heads and commenting on the power of a few councilors as opposed to the historic power of the press.

And, second, the day that Sally Gump told me she had all but been tossed out of the Chronicle because management there didn’t want her and her recall buddies in the building. This came in response to another attempt by Sally to give your reporter a heads up regarding the recall. And, predictably, nothing of the recall efforts made the Chronicle columns until Phil and Doug filed their SLAPP suits against Sally. The Chronicle in its infinite wisdom ran a glorifying article about the poor, put upon councilors as well as the indignant replies of the councilors to Sally’s attempt to recall them. (Keep those councilors happy and stay in business, I guess, huh? Damned be the news.)

Still, I wanted to believe you were truly good to your name and would report the news. So, I've watched the papers for weeks; I’ve never ceased to be amazed at what the Chronicle considers newsworthy and, oddly enough, what it chooses to ignore. Absolutely no word of the lawsuit coming to court made the paper the week it occurred. (I am anxious to see if the topic will ever appear in print again if left to you.) The only concession to actual coverage of the court scene was my letter, which appeared in the letters to the editor section two days after the court date. My assumption here is that if you print a letter to the editor in direct opposition to the councilors, you have "reported" on the topic without putting yourselves in the line of fire, so to speak.

I studied journalism in school. I read avidly. I know the definition of “news.” You have missed the boat more than once on this front; you are NOT publishing a newspaper according to the acknowledged definition of the word. Control of the press is the often the first sad sign of the demise of democracy and freedom. Many locals may not recognize your part in that, but I do. It is clear that the councilors of St. Helens, led by Phil Barlow, Doug Morten, and Keith Locke, have control of what you print, whether by their actions or your acceptance of their control.

My fondest hope is that you will pick up a dictionary or an old textbook and refresh your memory as to the purpose and, indeed, the responsibility of a newspaper. The councilors already have their propaganda rag, the city’s "news"letter, the Gazette (and it is proofed and edited about as well as yours). Citizens don’t need another councilor ego piece, especially one disguised as a newspaper.

I’ve had enough. I’ll find my proofreading exercises elsewhere. Please cancel my subscription.

Good luck.

Kim Bauer
Columbia City