DRC decision on Evergreen development

Images are examples of zero lot line homes on 2 lots, and a single home on one skinny lot

The Design Review Commission finished the Public Hearing relating to the Evergreen Neighborhood Association appeal of the permits for 4 zero-lot line homes on 5th St.

The meeting was televised, and I only caught the last portion of the discussion, but enough to know what the issues were that turned the decision to a No vote on the Permit Approval.  If the builder wants to continue with these plans, he will have to appeal the decision to the City Council.   If he does, I am certain the Evergreen Neighborhood Association will be there to object all over again.

The DRC got this one right.  They concluded that the degree of the requested variances was too much for this residential area.  It was not necessarily that there were six variances requested, or that any one was particularly bad, but that all together they did not present a situation where the end product would be "equal to or better than" the existing code.

Several commissioners felt that variances are for minor adjustments to code, like moving a setback a foot or two for a specific reason, not to maximize the volume of a structure by requesting changes to almost all of its dimensions.  The concept of "equal to or better than" is subjective and presents a hole in the codes that builders and staff can drive a truck through - if there is no criteria for what is acceptable.  Is "better than" a function of monetary value, aesthetic design, or neighborhood compatibility?  One commissioner felt this request looked more like a major, not minor development.

• The builder had argued that the lots presented a good "transition area" between commercial and single family residential areas, but the zoning code did not justify this reasoning.  

• The Evergreen Neighborhood overlay was considered seriously; one commissioner stated that the Planning Commission and neighborhood residents had worked many hours over many months to finalize the overlay, and they did not want to undo the benefits the citizens and city had worked so hard for. 

• It was agreed that there were plenty of examples of quality homes that can be built on skinny lots that would not need variances, so need was not an issue. (In fact, a local architect produced examples of  homes that could be built on substandard lots for the Planning Commission to consider last year.)

The Neighborhood Association will have to wait and see what the builder will do next.  It is obvious he put a lot of time and money into the project as is, but he was also encouraged to do so by our Planning Department that did not require him to abide by city codes.  We need clarity on what the Planning Department can and cannot do with the codes - how to interpret them, and when to allow variances - if any are allowed at all.

The day after

Getting Beyond  Election Day

Wall Street Journal, November 8, 2016 By Steven Bullock
What Ben Franklin Could Teach Us About Civility And Politness 
Politeness sought to escape the bitterness of continuing conflict. Instead of harshness, arrogance and anger, politeness encouraged sympathy, good humor and common ground.

Respecting other people led to goodwill. Continued cooperation was better than grudging consent. Franklin determined never to contradict other people’s statements in conversations. He would instead present his opinions modestly, with due regard to others’ attitudes and feelings.

Politeness sought to escape the bitterness of continuing conflict. Instead of harshness, arrogance and anger, politeness encouraged sympathy, good humor and common ground.

But Franklin did not believe doing the right thing always conflicted with the polite thing. He expressed pleasure at seeing important issues discussed “with decency and politeness,” “without party views, or party heat.” Such interchanges required what we call today “emotional intelligence,” awareness of other people’s attitudes and concerns.

//////////\\\\\\\\////////\\\\\\\\////////\\\\\\\\

I hesitate to present this next article just because of the title and references to Trump and Clinton within it. The subject is not about the presidential candidates however, but about political correctness and how it substitutes for deference.  It goes on to explain how "conservative" has become a bad word among some, how this came to be, and why conservativism is a force for good.

To some, the article may put liberalism in a bad light, but it makes a comparison between the two concepts in order to explain why one is currently dominate and the other is forced into the shadows.  These ideas are an important step in understanding and respecting how others we do not agree with think.

We may agree on where we are going, but not how to get there.  If we choose the wrong path, we may not get there at all.  As Ben Franklin suggests, with politeness we may discover how to resolve our differences without one point of view dominating the discussion.

Wall Street Journal, November 8, 2016 By Shelby Steele 
Trump, Clinton and the Culture of Deference

Political correctness functions like a despotic regime. We resent it but we tolerate it.

In the broader American culture—the mainstream media, the world of the arts and entertainment, the high-tech world, and the entire enterprise of public and private education—conservatism suffers a decided ill repute. Why?

Deference has been codified in American life as political correctness. And political correctness functions like a despotic regime. It is an oppressiveness that spreads its edicts further and further into the crevices of everyday life. 

"the great Business of Elections"

Dedicated to those who believe that the wisdom of the Founding Fathers is, and will always be, relevant and not subject to the whims of the day.    Up Sucker Creek


Wall Street Journal, November 8, 2016
Notable and Quotable

Samuel Adams

From an unsigned essay by Samuel Adams, published in the Boston Gazette on April 2, 1781, as quoted in “The Writings of Samuel Adams: Volume IV” (1908):

I hope the great Business of Elections will never be left by the Many, to be done by the Few; for before we are aware of it, that few may become the Engine of Corruption . . . Heaven forbid! that our Countrymen should ever be byass’d in their Choice, by unreasonable Predilections for any man, or that an Attachment to the Constitution, as has been the Case in other Countries, should be lost in Devotion to Persons. The Effect of this would soon be, to change the Love of Liberty into the Spirit of Faction. Let each Citizen remember, at the Moment he is offering his Vote, that he is not making a Present or a Compliment to please an Individual, or at least that he ought not so to do; but that he is executing one of the most solemn Trusts in human Society, for which he is accountable to God and his Country.

LO GIG is already OOD

OOD: Out of Date

What makes Lake Oswego think it can compete with a giant and win?  Arrogance can be very costly.  
To see which companies offer internet service in your zip code, click here:  BroadbandNow

How soon will technology be available for wireless internet connections? More or less than 30 years?

Lake Oswego, OR has a total of 25 Internet providers including 

• 2 Cable providers, 
• 5 Copper providers, 
• 6 DSL providers, 
• 3 Fiber providers, 
• 3 Fixed Wireless providers, 
• 5 Mobile providers, 
• 1 Satellite provider.

Comcast will launch gigabit service in Oregon early next year
Oregonlive, November 1, 2016  By Mike Rogoway

Excerpts:

Google's out. But Comcast says it's in.

The cable TV company said Tuesday it will begin offering superfast internet service in Oregon and Southwest Washington "in early 2017."

Comcast's speeds will run up to 1 gigabit per second, 25 times faster than the federal broadband standard, in this market and several others across the country.

Very few homes need gigabit connections, equivalent to 1,000 megabits per second. Those speeds are faster than almost any web service can support. Netflix, for example, says 25 megabits per second is fast enough for streaming its top-end, ultra-high-definition video.

That may change, though, as a proliferation of household devices put more strain on residential connections, especially in homes where multiple family members are online at once. And the proliferation of faster speeds may motivate companies to create new services that take advantage of those connections.

CenturyLink has already begun replacing its old copper phone lines in Portland with high-capacity fiber, and offers gigabit service in much of the city and in some suburbs, including parts of Lake Oswego and Vancouver.

Comcast's new 1 gig service, by contrast, doesn't require new wiring (it does, in some cases, need a new modem). It uses a technology called DOCSIS 3.1 that is compatible with Comcast's existing cable TV system.

Evergreen fights back - again

Here are Comments from Evergreen 
Neighborhood Residents

regarding a proposed (appealed to the DRC) that is proposing 6 variances that would increase lot coverage and building dimensions and waive certain neighborhood codes.  The bitter betrayal of the planning department when they approvied the Wizer Development in opposition to a Neighborhood Plan is an open wound.  Should their entire neighborhood be up for grabs?

Issue: If RIDs and variances are so easily approved, it reduces our detailed, neighborhood-specific development codes to mere suggestions.  It also opens wide the opportunity for unevn application of code, a common complaint.  

Many believe the incentive for the planming staff to ignore codes established to protect neighborhood character is to boost property taxes by maximizing the size and value of new homes.  The city is facing hefty PERS cost increases and desperately needs an influx of money into the general fund.  New tax money is job protection.  Reducing setbacks and crowding big homes onto lots takes away from our relaxed, suburban and small town feel, and removes more and more big trees from neighborhoods.  Many feel we are losing our town.

---------------

Please do not approve this proposed development. What is the purpose of having a code if it can be so easily countermanded? In this case the requested exemptions are major ones, allowing structures out of proportion to the rest of the neighborhood and altering the character of the area.

I urge you to do what the DRC is mandated to do. Be our watchdog. Ensure that development is within the guidelines designed for our area. We moved here over ten years ago specifically because of this neighborhood. Please do not change its character and integrity.
----------------

 I am not against all proposed projects in or around the neighborhood, however I strongly believe they should follow att city codes and our neighborhood overlay.  If a land developer is allowed to significantly violate, or get a variance on codes involving setback, lot coverage and wall height and neighborhood overlay, then why are these rules in place at all?  
----------------

If it's the developer's job to ask for the moon, then it's our job to reign on the developer with applied designed standards that have been long established from countless volunteer hours spent over similar projects in this community.   

This is a gross example of rule bending.  Please allow no exceptions.
----------------
Many of us are concerned that the City is disregarding its own planning codes, codes designed to benefit all of us and not just developers, by allowing variances to the property at 360 Fifth St.  
----------------
During the recent past some of the LO planning decisions have been made other than complete an with the various codes and not reflective of our wishes.
----------------
Our neighborhood and Lake Oswego in general, r twin value because each home has character and is not part of a development project.  These regulations exist to preserve the character of the neighborhood and to prevent it from becoming a development project.
----------------
PLEASE Lake Oswego Planning Staff, DO NOT LET THIS HAPPEN.  We already have much to contend with that is ruining our neighborhood character, the reason many of live here!
-----------------

Residential Infill Design Hoax

RID

Residential Infill Design

What it does to a neighborhood.

Evergreen Neighborhood
Development issue:  lot coverage, house size/mass, setbacks, roof projections, wall extensions..

Developer is requesting changes to the development code to allow Residential Infill Design changes to build 4 townhouses that would cover 41% of the lots and allow other exceptions to code that would increase the size and mass of the homes and undo the regular codes and the area code overlay.

RID is a process that allows changes to existing development codes for new development on pre-developed land.  This means, all codes are up for grabs!  Neighborhoods are wondering, why do we have codes or overlays at all if they can be challenged and changed so easily?    

For all documents related to the case, see Project Number: LU 15-0053

There is no reason why the variances need to occur, and the Evergreen NA has proposed options similar to another development on 6th Ave. (Use Link below to read an explanation of Evergreen's objections and counter proposal.)  The developer does not agree.  The permit has been approved by the planning department, however case has been appealed to the Design Review Commission, and deliberations will be held on Monday, Nov. 7.  (Meeting is televised on TVCTV and on the City website. - I think.) The testimony portion of the hearing is done.

Evergreen Neighborhood Association's objections to this development are thorough and well-reasoned.  What happens here will set the tone for all kinds of abuses of code in every neighborhood every time something new is built.  In this atmosphere, there is nothing anyone can count on  anymore.  The war between the Planning Department and Citizens continues.  What will the new council bring - more havoc or peace?

The Planning Department makes the code, the Planning Department interprets the code, and the Planning Department grants variances to the code.  Now we will see what the DRC does.  If the case is appealed further like the Wizer Block development permit, the City Council may hear the case and make the final decision.  How will the City Council treat these kinds of developer applications now and in the future?  How will citizen concerns stack up against developers' desires to upend our codes?  Why do you think local elections are so contentious these days?  It will only get worse.  Developers and builders are fighting over every scrap of land in the city no matter what is on the lot now.  It's ugly out there - one would say uncivil.  If the City Council wanted to bring peace to the land, they could stop all RIDs and variances now and do a review of why they are needed at all.  Don't hold your breath.  

From the Project website:

Applicant Request:

The applicant is requesting approval of the six following RID Review design variances in order to construct two pairs of zero-lot line dwellings:

•   Reduce the 25-foot front yard setback to 20 feet (Units A and D) and 24 feet (Units B and C);
•   Reduce the 15-foot combined total side yard setback for each pair to a 10-foot combined total;
•   Reduce the 30-foot rear yard setback to 20 feet (Units A and D) and 16 feet (Units B and C);
•   Increase the maximum allowed lot coverage for all lots by 479 sq. ft. (from 25% to 41%);
•   Allow 100% roof projections into the Evergreen Overlay front setback plane (Units B and C); and,
•   Allow wall plane extensions (22 feet for Unit A and 12 feet for Units B, C, and D) beyond the 60-  foot long wall plane maximum.

In order to construct the dwellings, the applicant is also requesting the removal of two trees, a 34-inch spruce and 52-inch cedar. 

Did you help pay for this?

Are you proud 

of how your hard-earned money was spent?  

Do you wish you had burned it instead?  

• Each mailing costs about $7,000* depending on size of piece and how many addresses it gets sent to. 
• Color glossy mailer count:  FOLO - 8  incl. 3 negative ads;  Studebaker for LO Mayor - 5 incl. 1 negative ad;  Friends of Jon Gustafson - 2;  Friends of Theresa Kohlhoff - 1.  Jon LaMotte and Dave Berg - 0;  O'Neill, and Collins  - Unknown.  
• Attention: The attack ad that appeared to come from Dave Berg (same colors, font, design, etc.) was a hoax done by Friends of Lake Oswego. See Dave's website: DaveBergForMayor.com     Note: Organizers and contributors of this PAC are NOT Friends of Lake Oswego!

* Full campaign accounting won't occur until after the election.  Look for In-Kind Contributions for unpaid campaign assistance and advertising.

This is all I do anymore - just report about trash.  It really makes me feel bad.  Most people will have voted by the end of the weekend, so thankfully there can't be much more left, although the bad feelings and rancor will continue well past the election.  Great job keeping it civil!

Shall we go through the names of who contributed to the nastiest of the lot?

Local supporters of Gustafson and Kohlhoff whose names are on one of the [NOT] Friends of Lake Oswego attack ads are:

• Joe Buck, Lake Oswego City Councilor
• Judie Hammerstad, former Mayor, Lake Oswego
• Ann Lininger, Democratic State Representative
• Darlene Hooley, Democratic US Congresswoman, retired

All the mailers I received this season 

plus the Mt. Park letter sent by the Studabaker campaign:

Kent Studabaker  |    Jon Gustafson and Theresa Kohlhoff   

[Not] Friends of Lake Oswego

Those responsible for the attack ads that sullied people's reputations 

should step up and apologize - loudly and publicly!   

Integrity , humility and a sense of shame demand it.  

How to ruin a city just like Portland

Is this what we want for Lake Oswego?  
How about multi-family, row-housing, skinny and tiny houses and cluster (courtyard or cottage) housing in your neighborhood?  Maybe in someone else's...?

This came from a friend who lives in SW Portland from her Nextdoor neighborhood website:  how long before it is introduced region-wide to solve a government-caused housing affordability crisis.

Portland:

Public Hearings on Proposed Zoning 

changes to densify your neighborhood 
                                        

November 9th and 16th   at 2 pm   

Written testimony accepted 

Attention Neighbors    

  

As citizens we attended Residential Infill Project (RIPSAC) meetings for the last 10 months. The Project’s goal was to preserve long standing and cherished neighborhoods while accommodating current and future residents.  

We were aghast to witness developers and so called “housing advocates” bulldoze through this re-zoning proposal which would allow multifamily dwellings in single family neighborhoods throughout the city.  This, despite the city’s own studies indicating that there is enough land to accommodate projected growth over the next 20 years without any zoning changes.

We all want suitable and affordable housing.  However, the proposal as written will not create affordable housing, and would destroy the integrity of existing neighborhoods.   It would dramatically increase demolitions of existing homes and increase displacement. 

Find the entire Proposal, and a 4 page summary at www.portlandoregon.gov/bps/infill
If approved, this Proposal would allow: 

• 2 ½ story Duplexes on most R5 lots in single dwelling zones,  Triplexes on corners, Reduced off street parking, and a meager  12x12 ft minimum for “outdoor recreation”. 
• No attempt to respect Neighborhood character, despite being a top priority voiced in public testimony. 
• No truth in zoning, making the concept of single dwelling zones meaningless. 
• Would encourage demolitions and escalate land prices and favors developers and landlords over homeowners. 
• Has no requirement for “affordability” 

Increasing density in the 2-3 blocks near urban centers is a good idea, and is in fact already in the city plan. But this proposal defines “nearby” as a quarter of a mile, effectively rezoning 65 % of the city. 

RIPSAC committee members who oppose this proposal have put forward an alternative that allows increased density in appropriate areas, while maintaining and respecting the character of existing neighborhoods.    

Public Hearings: Portland City Council Chambers                  

Wednesday November 9th and 16th  2 pm             

How do I testify at City Council?           

You may testify in person by signing up when you arrive (sign up starts at 1)

                               

You can also testify in writing:   Mail: 1221 SW Fourth Ave. Room 130, Portland, Oregon 97204 or Via email: CCTestimony@portlandoregon.gov. Written testimony must be received by the time of the last hearing on November 16, include name and address.

All meetings held in Council Chambers at City Hall, 1221 SW 4th Avenue. The public hearings will be broadcast live at www.portlandoregon.gov/article/230361.

We deserve better

Trash Talk: The Uncivil Civil Society

Do we really want polarizing trash-talkers for a Mayor and City Councilor?  Just say "No" to Kent Studebaker, Jon Gustafson and Theresa Kohlhoff.  With piles of money and a desperation to win, these three have engaged in some dirty tricks, mud-slinging, and polarizing rhetoric.  We don't need to go back to governance driven by outside influences, intolerant of others' opinions, and an agenda that puts power and personal goals ahead of what is best for the whole city.

We have been lied to and manipulated with trickery, innuendo, falsification of opponents's positions, and character assassinations.  Read the Lake Oswego Review articles below:

Lake Oswego Review, November 2, 2016. By Anthony Macuk

Campaign letter stirs controversy in Lake Oswego's Mountain Park neighborhood

Stationery and letterhead cause confusion about who actually mailed the Studebaker endorsement

Excerpt:

An endorsement letter from Kent Studebaker’s mayoral campaign caused confusion and anger among recipients in Lake Oswego’s Mountain Park neighborhood last week and prompted harsh words from the incumbent mayor’s challengers. 

The letter, which was written and signed by Mountain Park resident Matt Palmer, was produced entirely by the Studebaker campaign. But it featured a version of the Mountain Park Homeowners Association logo on the envelope and atop the letter itself, prompting some to interpret it as a direct endorsement from the HOA. 

It was not. 

“No one at the HOA had anything to do with it,” association President Dwight Sangrey told The Review on Monday, “or knew anything about it.”

Lake Oswego Review, November 2, 2016. By Anthony Macuk

Lake Oswego campaigns take a decidedly negative turn

Harsh words, grainy photos and even an image of a grimacing Donald Trump gives local races a nastier feel

Excerpt:
Throughout this year’s political campaigning, nearly every Lake Oswego candidate has made a point of contrasting the civility and respect of the local election with the cutthroat negativity and deep partisan rancor that has defined the 2016 presidential race.

There have been some exceptions, but that commitment to positivity has generally endured through most of the election season.

Not any more. 

Local races have taken on an increasingly bitter tone in the last week, with mayoral candidates Jon Gustafson and Kent Studebaker embarking on a final blitz of advertising and campaign mailers that openly highlight sharp political divisions between two of the three candidates in the city’s nominally nonpartisan mayoral election.

*

Why do candidates engage in negative advertising?  Does it even work?  I had to find out.  Here is a good site that presents several research papers on aspects of negative electioneering.  Use link below to go to the website to find links to original research and a video on how to dissect campaign advertising.  

Journalist's Resource

Negative political ads and their effect on voters: Updated collection of research

Many people have a visceral reaction to political attack ads on TV: Not much will prompt a faster change of the channel. But they are difficult to escape during election season and the 2016 presidential election season won’t be much different.

Political scientists have long been studying the effects of negative ad campaigns on voter opinion, and many analysts focused on how campaign 2012 was affected. But scholars have complicated the simplistic view that negative ads “work” as a general rule. During the 2012 campaign, the Washington Post wrote about five commonly held “myths” about campaign ads, while the New York Times analyzed the specific circumstances when ads matter and their design and effects. At a deeper level, such ads may work to both “shrink and polarize the electorate,” as the political scientists Shanto Iyengar of Stanford and Stephen Ansolabehere of Harvard have long pointed out.

• "We find that candidates can benefit from having a party or group ‘do their dirty work,’ but particularly if a group does, and that the most likely explanation for why this is the case is that many voters simply do not connect candidates to the ads sponsored by parties and groups."
• "Our results suggest that it is never efficacious for candidates to run attack ads, but running positive ads can increase a candidate’s margin of victory"
• "We find partisans disproportionately tune out ads aired by their party’s opponents, though this behavior is asymmetric: Republican-identifiers are more consistent screeners of partisan ads than Democrats."
• "All told, the research literature does not bear out the idea that negative campaigning is an effective means of winning votes, even though it tends to be more memorable and stimulate knowledge about the campaign. Nor is there any reliable evidence that negative campaigning depresses voter turnout, though it does slightly lower feelings of political efficacy, trust in government and possibly overall public mood.”

Remember - it still comes down to the fact that there are people out there who are fighting for control of our town for their own purposes, and to accomplish this, they are willing to throw a lot of money into some  campaigns.  Follow the money!  

Campaign finance update

Have you been receiving a lot of direct mail political ads for local candidates?  It's like a snowstorm!

Ever wonder what happens to your paper recyclables?  What is the carbon footprint of each direct mailer?   Here is an article to consider how "green" all that advertising is.  The problem with this campaign is that some candidates have

TOO MUCH MONEY!  

This is my last update before the election.  After the election, final accounting will reveal who gave money to whom and for what, and how much each candidate spent per vote.

All figures are YTD.

Mayor.                                                                                                                                            
Dave Berg
Largest contributor:                        $  1,500 - Esther / Gerry Good
Contributions:                                 $  7,542
Expenditures:                                  $  1,374
Balance:                                          $  6,168
Biggest Expense:                            $     895 - Community Newspapers

Jon Gustafson
Largest contributor:                        $  2,000 - Portland Metropolitan Assn. of Realtors
Contributions:                                 $29,931
Expenditures:                                  $25,004
Balance:                                          $. 5,791
Biggest Expense:                            $10,000 - Contributions to Friends of Lake Oswego PAC

Kent Studebaker
Largest contributor:                        $  9,000 - Erika Miller
Contributions:                                 $40,079
Expenditures:                                  $18,127
Balance:                                          $22,553
Biggest Expense:                            $  8,433 - Lowell's Print-Inn Inc.

City Council                                                                                                                              
Charles Collins
Largest contributor:                       $    500 - Jim Fulwiler; Darrell Brett; Tony Christler
Contributions:                                $ 9,225
Expenditures:                                 $ 8,499
Balance:                                         $    725
Biggest Expense:                           $ 4,127 - Pamplin Media Group

John Lamotte
Largest contributor:                       $ 1,000 - Local 1159 Firepac
Contributions:                                $14,297
Expenditures:                                 $ 9,367
Balance:                                         $ 4,929 (-$9,727 outstanding personal loan)
Biggest Expense:                           $ 2,736 - Community Newspapers

Theresa Kohlhoff
Largest contributor:                       $    900 - Speingwater Partners Inc. (Paige Richardson)
Contributions:                                $23,103
Expenditures:                                 $14,100
Balance:                                         $  9,002
Biggest Expense:                           $  4,500 - Friends of Lake Oswego PAC

Skip O'Neill
Largest contributor:                       $  1,350 - SE Oak Properties (owned by Skip O'Neill)
Contributions:                                $  4,625
Expenditures:                                 $  3,297
Balance:                                         $  1,346
Biggest Expense:                           $  1,350 - PatMacDesign

Other PACs                                                                                                                              
Friends of Lake Oswego  (PAC supporting Gustafson and Kohlhoff)
Largest contributor:                       $10,000 - Jon Gustafson
Contributions:                                $31,425
Expenditures:                                 $27,967
Balance:                                         $  3,457
Biggest Expense:                           $27,494 - Morel Ink

Creepies are lurking

Only 6 more days (or so) for my blot and spider friends to hang around.  Where will they go next?  What other town or creepy cause will they attach themselves to?  What other city will they choose to undermine with their secret undertakings?

Someday I hope the person behind this will have the guts to tell me who they are (I have a pretty good guess).  But I won't hold my breath.  People who sneak around aren't very above board and honest anyway.

Studebaker picks his team

What's the big deal with the Mayor's race this year?

ick!

Since Jon Gustafson is going to go for a slate of candidates for a 

"Progressive Majority on the Lake Oswego City Council," 

Kent Studebaker is advertising his slate for a "Nonpartisan" crew.  

Each of them is telling you who they want to work with, who they want elected that shares their point of view, and which team we should be on.  Normally I don't mind that candidates align with one another, but this year everything seems antagonistic, especially in the Mayoral race in the fight between Kent Studebaker and Jon Gustafson. First one does or says something, and then the other does it back.  (See previous post "Tit for tat")

It is obvious that these two candidates for mayor have way too much money to throw back and forth!  A second look at their campaign $upporter$ is needed.  Who wants these guys to be elected, and why?    

Where is Dave Berg in all this?  

Out pounding the pavement, talking to citizens, calling and talking to them, answering their questions, absorbing their comments and concerns.  Berg's integrity is unquestioned and his nonpartisanship extends to his campaign supporters - he has no special interests.  

While the other boys are slugging it out in the pits, give Dave Berg, a well-qualified, dignified leader the opportunity to guid the city to a great and stable future, built on the character and charm of Lake Oswego, and concern for its citizen.  

Thank goodness November 8 is just 6 days away!  

Studebaker's explanation

Letter from Kent Studebaker to Dwight Sangrey, Board President of Mountain Park HOA

EMAIL FROM MAYOR KENT STUDEBAKER TO BOARD PRESIDENt DWIGHT SANGREY

Dwight,

I offer my very sincere apologies for the confusion which a letter to Mountain Park voters has caused. But first let me say that Matt Palmer was in no way responsible for that confusion and any blame should never be placed on Matt.

Let me try to explain what happened here.

Mountain Park is an important part of this community and as mayor I go to great lengths to make sure that the residents feel included in decisions related to Lake Oswego and that they know I consider them a very important part of this city. It was for that reason (and in addition to the campaign flyers they receive) that I wanted a special letter to go to the voters in Mountain Park. Matt Palmer is a supporter of mine and a resident, and he said he would write a personal letter as a private citizen to voters there. He did that and signed a PDF of the letter and that was the last he saw of it.

Bear with me please as I explain the process after that.

The PDF of the letter went to the printer/ mail house to be set on stationery which we purchased. Since the letter head was very plain, a suggestion was made to make it more interesting. Hence the decision was made to put onto the letter head and the envelope the iconic Mountain Park entrance which is pictured on the web. The brick wall and the brown background of the entrance picture did not translate well in black, so the background was taken out, leaving the final image which was on the mailer. No attempt was made to make it look like the HOA image – in fact the people involved in the decision did not look at the HOA image until after the mail piece arrived and Matt called to express his concern. Any similarity between the mailer image and the HOA image was pure coincidence and innocently done. In no part of the letter text was the HOA mentioned and the HOA mailing list was not used. The list used was a registered voter list which we purchased at the beginning of the campaign and the stationery was all ours.

A lengthy explanation I know – but it may help to clarify things.

Once again I want to say how sorry I am for the confusion and to repeat that no blame should be laid at Matt Palmer’s feet. Matt did not see the final letter head or envelope.

I am passionate about this community and in no way do I want to offend any of its members. I look forward to working with everybody and I know that Matt looks forward to being an active member and participant in everything in Mountain Park.

Thank you all for your understanding.

Kent Studebaker.

Tit for tat

Tut, tut, tut.

Can't we all play nice together?  

While the rest of the kids study, the three at the back of the class keep fighting!  

None of them can claim to be for civility in Lake Oswego politics. 

Jon Gustafson and Theresa Kohlhoff's advertising is always about party politics - social issues that don't apply to municipal government.  It seems they only see the world in RED and BLUE and blue is better.  It's funny then that their page is trimmed with purple.  Just like National politics, this ad is full of hyperbole, innuendo, lies and half-truths. Where does one begin.  

I apologize for the fuzziness of the text - I think it is readable though.

For a NONPARTISAN campaign, the only people who stand out as exclusively partisan are Jon and Theresa who identify themselves as Democrats who stand with Hillary.  They made a mistake - the photos of Studebaker and Collins make the two look nice!  

I don't know why Charles Collins is suddenly brought into the fight between Gustafson and Studabaker other than they needed one candidate for council to make the columns even, and they see him as a threat.  (An enemy of your enemy is my friend.)  

I hate partisan politicking in Lake Oswego.  Haven't we had enough division to last forever!

Cronyism:  The City Council (not just the mayor) voted to hire someone as temporary city manager who had experience with our city government was no involved with the previous administration.  Tom Coffee had that experience and fit the bill.  His position was temporary 

until the entire council chose a new Manager.  

"Enxtreme conservative" is used as an incendiary phrase - red meat - to get Democrats and progressives riled up and think of these candidates as "others."  Just what we don't need - more [party] division!  

On Climate Change: What was the final vote Jon?  Many people don't think CC belongs in 

city politics. This shows how intolerant Jon and Theresa are - they can't abide people with opinions other than their own. Especially if decisions don't go their way.  Didn't the city wind up buying alternative power at a higher cost - just as you wanted?  What's the beef?

Sustainability Coordinator:  When the budget is tight, EVERY position should be evaluated for cuts.  Lowering our carbon footprint and saving money is good, but department managers should be doing this already.  

Lake Oswego Youth Advisory Council:  Let's look at it in a year and see what they have done that is useful.  The group that did a presentation made it seem like a club where they bought T-shirts and ate snacks.  It wasn't convincing enough to dedicate city money for the effort.  There are other civic-minded organizations out there that aren't attached to government - but that's what this is really about isn't it?  More government.  Kids are NOT lazy or stupid and if they want to volunteer, they can figure it out on their own.  

Sensitive Lands:  $80k in legal fees to defend citizens' property rights was the right thing to do.  I always think it hypocritical that the people who are for more environmental "protections" - prohibitions - regulations - don't have sensitive lands on their property.  And people who advocate for mass transit always seem to drive cars.  

Now the sun comes out and the birds start to sing - the progressives will take over and save the world from those awful "conservatives."   Sigh.  The most restrictive regulations are always done in the name of "helping us."  Progressives want to make their ideology mandatory and accelerate whatever change they want to see.  This takes a huge hit out of our Liberty and right to Chose how to live and how to spend our money (labor).

 Jon and Theresa don't say anything that any citizen wouldn't want for our city - parks, library, police, fire fighters... They make it sound like they are the only ones to have these ambitions.  

Progressives want to jump in and solve every social problem with the force of government and public money to do it.  Private organizations have been doing after-school care for decades.  The school district has programs.   Should the City take on one more program just to make Jon and Theresa feel good?