Resolution will not stop law enforcement
I had not heard the word “inclusivity” used before. I looked in my well-worn Merriam-Webster and could not find it there. I am evidently out of touch with new reality. Questioning my local coffee gathering and friends in the city was no real help.
This is in reference to the April 4 meeting of the Monmouth City Council.
I was not in attendance, but I read in the paper. It seems that our city council finds it necessary to become politically correct and state for publication that Monmouth will become a city open to all that wish to enter regardless of race, religion, political affiliation, gender identification, etc.
I thought that we were always a welcoming community. However, the buzz words “Sanctuary City” did get my attention.
We have a new president and cabinet that intends to run the United States as the founders intended.
A country with laws. A country open to all that enter through the front door, as do many. Those that enter illegally are in violation of the law. Exactly the same as those who break any of the other laws of the land. You commit a crime; you are a criminal.
Now, does the city of Monmouth mean that those that broke the law are to be regarded as equal to the law-abiding citizenry of our city?
There are many illegal immigrants in the Monmouth/Independence area. Our police force has known this as well.
They have been prevented by previous administrations from doing their job. Now, the laws (that have been in place for years) will have to be enforced.
Action by the city council cannot prevent this. I can only hope that Monmouth will not become one of the so called “Sanctuary Cities” that refuse to enforce the law.
Harold E. Pippin
Roundabout is greener, best choice
Based on the arguments made thus far in letters to the editor opposing the installation of a roundabout at the Clow Corner intersection, I remain unconvinced.
From what’s been written thus far, I am led to assume that none of those in opposition have had any extended experience with roundabouts or understand how they work, other than, perhaps, with the bastardized versions found here in the U.S.
Roundabouts are far superior to stop lights in many ways. One way they are safer is that no one runs the chance of an accident caused by someone running a light, because there’s no light to run.
All traffic is forced to slow to enter the circle. Clow Corner is a problem in the first place because the traffic racing up and down 99W has the right-of-way over traffic trying to cross, exit off of, or enter 99W.
As it is, one is often forced to dart between oncoming traffic. If stoplights were installed to alleviate this, then everyone would have to take their turn stopping and waiting. With a properly configured (European style) traffic circle, however, everyone slows and yields to traffic already in the circle, but the transitions are smooth and less time overall is wasted as it is idling at a light.
Anyone caring to do the research will find that roundabouts are safer than intersections with traffic signals. And when the inevitable accidents do occur, they occur at far lower and less lethal speeds. Finally, I would add that roundabouts are more expensive to install than lighting systems, but they don’t take any power at all to keep them in service.
So for a greener Oregon, roundabouts make a lot more sense.
Oregon needs a new money source
Next May, I’ll support tax increases for worthy causes like Polk County, but how long can Oregon depend upon property taxes? Single family home ownership rates vary from 42 to 61 percent.
The burden on a single family is not comparable to a landlord or business/corporation who pass along increases. They don’t “donate” this extra expense.
Property taxes are a disproportionate burden on single family homeowners. Twenty percent of our house payment is for property taxes alone and, like most homeowners, we’re not rich. How does it make sense that those who don’t own property can vote to tax those who do?
SW Polk posts bond measure
We’re told the bond is to build a new station in the Salt Creek area.
Is there clarity as to lateral costs involved?
Who will do building and equipment maintenance?
What are projected cost of utilities and other ongoing costs?
If volunteers tend the building/equipment, where may they come from?
From Dallas Fire Chief: Acquiring and retaining volunteers is a challenge at best.
Will career personnel care for the building/equipment? Who pays this cost?
Let’s evaluate all costs concerning this bond.
Remember; we’re still paying the Sheriff’s Office levy. Certainly, homes will be challenged by additional annual property tax increase.