HomeMy WebLinkAboutGlenn Street Crossing
~~
.~(5 ~~
S$L - O(~
~~ tn lc
tf~~ .
. MT VtA.~
~
{. Jk ~~
- V~ ~lAL€1"
~ aN. &vC1Ah-
~-vV~'~~
~+
~ -reo YY\~ CJJ(5)
~to vJ~ ~
~~~
~
~I( ~ {oi-
;<. \
~
ruJ.h ~~ to t"J .
~~r~
~~o;:y i~
~c ~ 0], ~tf
~~~
~ Q~Vl /.
~~
~. ~[) ~~
~ o-v--r' - 0
r ' ..
,[f. ~~~
T~ ~~~
~ ctQ~ m~'-
~~-
(~
(2-~~ 07
~ JJ ({ tJ:I>
)-~~
^"" ~ ,:>.~ th .8
{~ \j ~ R .l2
.c:: I c::
JI. ~8 E
\J (t <t.~ 5: ~
'>-> B Q:e t ~
ct} ~H: 'Z ~ '"
~ ~-~~~1 ~J' ~
.,
..
.
.
-,~-.1!'-l ? , l>l>
,j,1' <. ::J ;: ...... <:( ~' -tk-o -, - ., CJ)
\,,~.w~l.()..92-.:t J .J--~ ... )z:J:o"TI
~ u.. ~ ::- -g ~ . f1Jt'"v-/' ~j;~. ' ~ ~ !; ~
_.~,.'''1> ~
tl -mm~ · ' z-<
.. L ~ ,0 '" ' " · .' , 3 C ....
h1' . --.,' '" '_ '" - 0" ~
>U ,,< ~ 0 ~ c ~_ ',r - :i.. -.'~ ! en Q m
(::S. '" ......._ ~ '" - If"""'^' ,., ~ - c"" "~ -< "
, .3" -~ .S on O'? ..' . I\) -< m
, _... .0 0 1;; '" ~. " 0 ~
) ?/> ~.~ ~ (l) Q: ~~.~ ~ ~ 8 c
, '4 Q;:;E~ "'2' ,0 r
: if' hi € .S ~;;; ~ t( ",'../ ..' :3 ~ >
! '-' ~ ~3:-%o~ ...J.:- .... _"^AG .= Q::tl
,~ ~<(_ '" IQ ~ _ Z'" rO:
~ l'-' l-= ~~~ aU ~ : ~
I I- mm~E ;;:0..1 Z
. Z E~::J(l)~ ,c.r G1
w <(n.2", -lc""
::E .1! Jl> '" ::; ::;
~ :;:; 1; ';; ;; ?Z ? co
5i~~~~=U)~- - "~-'-
-, ,15 . .~ ~ . u. ,A ~
Cl ~.91'" m ~
<t &Q.o8-A--!t tf
Q.o,< co W C.
---) E.C:: . (l)
~o"::;C3''-
::> u(l)o::J
~bj)~~ ~~
~~~
~. CVO~~
~~
~~IMA-
~Aif~ iiif
<
--=OR E \.J -Zv;'
and Conlmunities are Making it Happen In Oregon
Safe Routes to School (SRTS) programs use a comprehensive
approach to make school routes safe for children to walk and
bicycle. Community leaders, parents and schools are usingthese
programs to better the lives of their children one step at a time.
Issue Why Safe Routes Works
Traffic clogs the roads around Leaving the car at home reduces
schools, creating a difficult and the traffic surrounding schools and
unsafe environment for walking I improves air quality
! and bicycling I
r;;;'ent~ and (h;I~'en a,e-';';;;k,n;--tl Safety i~~~:'::~~~~~~on~~~~ all
and bicycling in unsafe conditions good SRTS programs
;-.--.-..--.---.--...--.-.----r----.--.--................-........
. More children are becoming less Walking and bicycling to and from
; physically active I school can contribute towards the
i development of a lifelong habit of
..._....... ......._. ._.._..,.... ......., .__.L~~~Sic~.I.~.=~iVi~=.. . .
Start Now
(,iatlorl recogr:
'I ( :i i (.IV id I fl.g j, j rl'u~ 1'1(1
".1 oJ. -,' 1 \.0 , ..~ l' ! 5
<::"'ll' lip I'~J" C:;.jfe R' ('ll'ti'( ".'
,-, '- J ._ 1,...),,' l ,.;.4 ".' ,
vd of
t( :) iV d ')
t" w(.t -J 'JII' -II r"
,I} \..:,j (n )f, ~)!
J~ -j ri :l-iort;
ani C
l' j,_!!~:.f ,i~ ) ,_ ~\{'utes
"'('.
.\)
Julie Yip
503-986-4196
j ul ie.a. yip@odot.state.or.us
Or ViSit the Oregon Safe Rou to School Web Silt 31
http://www .orego n .gov/ODOl/lS/saferoutes.shtml
Success
A successful Safe Routes to School
program is a sustained effort that
involves bringing the right mix
of people together, identifying
the issues and finding ways to
improve walking and bicycling
conditions. Safe Routes to School
programs work to...
· assess the safety of school travel
routes
· encourage more walking and
bicycling to school through fun
promotions and events
· make engineering changes such
as building sidewalks, improving
streets crossings and training
crossing guards
· educate students, parents and
drivers about safe travel
· promote safe walking and
bicycling throughout the
community
SafeRoutes
Oregon Safe Routes To School
ElIIB
. -.----..~.--~~ -- ""--~.-_-'--m_.~-.__~_w_.~___._~_'".______.._____n~.,~'._.,_.__.__,
International Walk to School
Many established Safe Routes to School programs have been launched as a
result of Walk to School events. Traditionally held in October, Walk to School
events offer communities an excellent launch for a Safe Routes to School
program conducted throughout the year. Please visit wwwwaiknbikeorg for
more information and resources for Walk to School events in Oregon.
Promising Examples from Across Oregon
· Over 65 schools and 12,500 kids walked and biked to school during Oregon's
2005 Walk + Bike to School Day in October.
· In Ashland, middle and elementary schools provide an intensive bicycle safety
education course to students each year.
· In Eugene-Springfield, Commuter Solution's Smart Ways to School Program
provides free services that help parents form carpools and organize student
walking and biking groups.
· In Corvallis, a Safe Routes to School Task Force has brought together officials
from the city, school district and health department, and with information
gathered from parent surveys the Task Force is looking for ways to improve
traffic flow around schools.
· The Golden Sneaker Award was given to SE Portland fifth grade students who
"virtually" walked across the USA and back in one school year.
National Safe Routes Resources
The National Center for Safe Routes to School offers a host of tools and
resources for program coordinators to establish, implement and promote their
SRTS programs, including:
· SRTS-related education and promotional materials
· A comprehensive online guide offering a variety of information and materials
needed to create a SRTS program
· Training options ranging from a multi-day course to providing a speaker for a
conference
· An onlme database with information about State SRTS programs, as well as
local projects and activities that receive federal funding
· Technical assistance resources to answer SRTS inquiries
i
737-3456 (8-06)
SIC # 330535
Routes
Oregon Safe Routes To School
.0
Safe Routes to School:
Creating an Action Plan
Instructions
Please read these instructions before completing the Action Plan.
Creating the Action Plan is the first step in the application process for Oregon Safe Routes to
School funding.
This document is a template that will walk you through the development of a Safe Routes to School
Action Plan. The resulting Plan will be site-specific for your project school serving any grades from
kindergarten up to 8th grade.
Working through the template will provide guidance in bringing the required people (the School Team)
together to gather the necessary information to assess the barriers and hazards to children walking or
bicycling to and from school. With the conclusions drawn from the collected information, the Team will
be able to recommend priority projects and activities that the school, municipality and community can
advance to promote safe walking and bicycling to school. The Action Plan recommendations will
range from engineering improvements to programmatic actions (education, encouragement and
enforcement).
This completed Plan, along with all requested and optional attachments, is required to be submitted
along with the Application for Safe Routes to School Funding.
The application begins on Page 8.
Section 1: School information (for schools K-8)
This section includes basic information about the school, including location, enrollment, and contact
information for the Safe Routes to School Action Plan.
Section 2: Forming the School Team
The development of the Plan is through a coalition of interested parties, identified here as the School
Team. Successful School Teams embrace the goal of the Safe Routes to School Program to enable
children to walk and bicycle to and from school safely.
The School Team is the workforce that gathers the necessary information needed to assess current
attitudes and existing conditions. The Team is made up of required key partners plus optional
community partners whose backgrounds and affiliations represent a wide range of interests and
expertise that are related to SRTS.
The School Team's size should be manageable, yet allow for community-wide collaboration,
distribution of tasks and ease of individual efforts. Your school team should include:
School representatives - PT AlPTO/site council member; principal and/or other school staff such as
nurse and/or PE teacher; students; district transportation coordinator; district management or school
board member; safety patrol coordinator; bus driver; school crossing guard; etc.
Local government - Councilor commission member; transportation or traffic engineer; public works
representative; traffic safety committee member; local planner; law enforcement, emergency medical
services or fire department; bicycle/pedestrian advisory committee; municipal or regional transit
agency if applicable; etc.
Safe Routes to School Action Plan, rev 2:2007
Instructions
1
Community representatives -- neighborhood or community association members; chamber of
commerce or business associations; bicycle/pedestrian advocates; public health professionals; local
stakeholder community groups and non-profit organizations; rail, trucking industry representatives, if
applicable; media or marketing representative; etc.
Section 3: Assessing the modes of student travel
The School Team will need to develop an understanding of the routes by which children travel to the
school. Information can be gathered at many levels: from the school or school district; by surveying
the students and the parents; from observational surveys recording actual travel by students; by
walking the neighborhoods or bicycling around the school and mapping routes where kids walk and
bicycle; gathering information from School Patrol or Adult Crossing Guards; getting information from
local law enforcement or traffic safety engineers familiar with the transportation system around the
school.
The information requested in the Plan will be the minimum number of assessments out of a wide
range of available activities. The completion of this work should provide the School Team with
enough information to draw conclusions about the ability of the students to walk and bicycle to school.
However, additional support information may be needed to make this determination (such as traffic
counts, collection of crash data, speed study, etc.). The Team must rely upon the recommendations
of the local experts to determine what further information may be needed.
. Student Tally
As part of this section of the Plan, you are asked to conduct a student in-class tally. The form for the
tally and the tabulating spreadsheet can be downloaded from the National SRTS Program website:
http://www.saferoutesinfo.orqlresources/index.cfm under "Evaluation."
The Student Tally is an in-class travel tally that teachers or volunteers are to administer. Teachers or
volunteers can use this form to record specific information about how children arrive and depart from
school each day for a week. An Excel spreadsheet that will help you tabulate your school's data can
be obtained from the Oregon SRTS Coordinator, by request by email: iulie.a.yip@odot.state.or.us.
Instructions and a sample spreadsheet are also available.
Submit an electronic copy of the tabulated data spreadsheet on CD to the SRTS Program Manager.
. Parent Survey
The Parent Survey collects information about factors, beliefs and attitudes that affect parents'
decisions about their children walking and bicycling to school. The survey results will help your Team
determine how to improve opportunities for children to walk or bike to school. For a downloadable
form, go to the National SRTS Program website: http://www.saferoutesinfo.orq/resources/index.cfm
under "Evaluation."
An Excel spreadsheet that will help you tabulate your school's data can be obtained from the Oregon
SRTS Coordinator, by request by email: julie.a.yip@odot.state.or.us. Instructions and a sample
spreadsheet are also available.
Submit an electronic copy of the tabulated data spreadsheet on CD to the SRTS Program Manager.
Safe Routes to School Action Plan, rev 2:2007
Instructions
2
Optional survey
The School Team may wish to confirm the results of the Student Tally or may wish to do
actual on-site observations of how students arrive and leave school. The following is an
accepted method for conducting an Observation Study:
This is a simple "tick mark" tally done by volunteer observers with clipboard and survey
sheet at these areas:
· the school's bike rack area, if one exists
· at the crosswalks or pathways adjacent to the school
· at the bus and/or auto pick-up/drop-off area
The observations should be made at least 15 minutes before the start of school until ten
minutes after the bell rings. Reverse the process for after school. The observers record
tick marks for each student observed as a Walker, Bicyclist, Other (for scooter,
skateboard, in-line skates, wheelchairs), school or public bus rider, or motor vehicle
rider. This should be repeated the same day at the end of school when children are
leaving. Make sure the survey is dated, location noted, weather conditions noted, and
the time period of the survey. Ideally the survey should span Monday through Friday of
that week. At the end of the week, five days worth of actual observations will have been
collected.
· Walking and Bicycling Audits
Conduct a walk-about or bike-about with students and parents, neighbors, school staff and other
stakeholders. The following link is to checklists on the National SRTS Program website, under
"Education," to help determine the "walkability" and "bikeability" of the area.
· http://www . saferoutesinfo. orq/resources/index. cfm
The School Team may wish to follow the linked checklists, or they may want to follow their own
format in assessing the "walkability" and the "bikeability" of the immediate school neighborhoods.
Concentrate particularly on a one-half mile radius for an elementary school, or a one-mile radius for a
secondary school (no more than a maximum two-mile radius around the school). Not every street
must be evaluated, just those streets you believe are critical to walking or bicycling to school,
including parks, bike lanes, walkways or trails, and other public right-of-way facilities if they are or
could be used by students to travel to and from school.
Walkability questions to consider: Are the sidewalks, paths and/or trails on school property
connected to logical residential neighborhood access points? Is there room to walk? Are there
sidewalks, or shoulders where there were no sidewalks? Are you able to cross safely where you can
see and be seen by drivers? Does it feel safe to walk? Can students safely and conveniently reach
unlocked school entry doors from these locations?
Pedestrian safety questions to consider: Does the school provide safety information and/or
participate in events that promote safe walking and physical activity such as International Walk and
Bike to School Day or walk-a-thons? Is there pedestrian safety guidance given to students who cross
with the School Patrol or Adult Crossing Guard?
Bikeability questions to consider: Do you have safe bicycle routes? Are there paths, trails, wide
sidewalks, low-traffic streets, bike lanes or good shoulders to ride safely with traffic? Does it feel safe
Safe Routes to School Action Plan, rev 2:2007
Instructions
3
riding with traffic? How was the surface that you rode on? How were the intersections that you rode
through?)
Bike safety and security questions to consider: Are visibly-placed bicycle racks available to
students at the school? Are there enough to accommodate an increase in bicycles? Can students
easily and safely access them? Are they sheltered from the weather? Are bikes in a secure location?
Are there opportunities for students to learn about bicycle safety? Are students involved in after-
school bike clubs or teams? Is helmet use encouraged?
· Community involvement
Invite the local community and/or the School Team to a mapping and brainstorming session where
they can give input on conditions and possible solutions, in addition to helping to determine the best
current and/or future routes within two miles from residential neighborhoods to the school.
City maps may be found at: http://eQov.oreQon.Qov/ODOTITDITDATAlQis/CitvMaps.shtml
Maps may also be found at the school district website; Google.com; earth.google.com; Yahoo.com;
Mapquest.com; or from your local public works department. *Please include copies of the maps as a
supplement to this Plan.
Optional activities
The street assessments may bring up questions about the motoring environment on
certain streets. The School Team may wish to collect additional information on those
streets for the following:
· Traffic volume counts, posted speeds and actual speeds: you may wish to work with
law enforcement or the local public works department to track motorist speeds and
monitor traffic volume counts.
· Traffic crash data: this information may be obtained from your local public works
department or the ODOT Transportation Safety Division Traffic Records Program.
Crash data may also be available from your local law enforcement agency.
· Crosswalk information may also be obtained from the School Safety Supervisor,
school patrol members or adult crossing guards.
Section 4: Summarizing the findings
Using the information gathered in Section 3, it is now time for the School Team to come together to
analyze the survey evaluation results, collected data, and maps the School Team or its sub-
committees have prepared, and identify the barriers and hazards to children walking and bicycling to
the school. Include:
· A list of physical environmental barriers and hazards. (Examples: broken and uneven
sidewalks; overgrown vegetation; narrow gravel shoulders and no bike lane or sidewalk on
approach to school; in crosswalk from school, left or right-turn conflicts when pedestrians have
the signal; school parking lot needs better pedestrian flow; bike racks in bad shape, not
enough... )
· A list of education/encouragement/enforcement barriers and hazards. (Examples: no crossing
guard or school patrol at crosswalk across busy street; traffic exceeds 20 mph of school zone;
Safe Routes to School Action Plan, rev 2:2007
Instructions
4
walkable neighborhoods but parents prefer to drive students to school; no pedestrian safety
information provided at school; no local enforcement...)
Section 5: Identifying the solutions and creating the Action Plan
Now that the issues have been identified, the School Team is ready to recommend solutions that
make up the Action Plan. The expertise of the different School Team members and other interested
parties and stakeholders will be especially valuable.
Careful consideration must be given for each SRTS component:
· Engineering - Creating operational and physical improvements to the infrastructure
surrounding schools that reduce speeds and potential conflicts with motor vehicle traffic, and
establish safer and fully accessible crossings, walkways, trails and bikeways. Engineering
strategies are best used in conjunction with the remaining E's.
· Education - Teaching children about the broad range of transportation choices, instructing
them in important lifelong bicycling and walking safety skills, and launching driver safety
campaigns in the vicinity of schools.
· Encouragement - Creating events, activities and ongoing programs to promote walking and
bicycling and providing safe opportunities for parents and students to travel together and
inspire each other.
· Enforcement - Partnering with local law enforcement to ensure traffic laws are obeyed in the
vicinity of schools (this includes enforcement of speeds, yielding to pedestrians in crossings ,
and proper walking and bicycling behaviors), and initiating community enforcement such as
crossing guard programs.
· Evaluation - Monitoring and documenting outcomes and trends through the collection of data,
including the collection of data before and after the intervention(s).
Guidance on the 5 E's is available online from the National Center for Safe Routes to School,
http://www.saferoutesinfo.orQ/Quide/index.cfm
Section 6: Submitting the Action Plan
Congratulations! The School Team has systematically assessed the barriers and hazards to children
walking and bicycling to school and developed strategies for improvement. The resulting Action Plan
is the roadmap for the school's Safe Routes to School Program.
Submit this completed document and all supplemental materials along with the Application for the
Oregon Safe Routes to School Funding.
Implementation
Now that the School Team has completed and submitted the Action Plan, it is time to take action.
The process through which the Action Plan was created has given your new Safe Routes to School
Task Force a chance to find out what resources and stakeholders are available to help achieve
success. Even before your application is reviewed and possibly funded, there are undoubtedly
activities that can begin immediately using existing staff, volunteers and resources.
Safe Routes to School Action Plan, rev 2:2007
Instructions
5
In addition, the Safe Routes to School funds currently available from the federal government are most
likely not enough by themselves to solve all of the needs of every Oregon community. They are
intended to be a catalyst to build relationships, complete demonstration projects and show success,
which will then inspire communities to find other resources.
Below are some of the tactics other communities have used to start a program without a large budget,
or before acquiring dedicated Safe Routes to School funding:
Engineering
While there may be large projects that need to be funded, there are certainly smaller projects and
activities that can be done without major funding. In fact, Safe Routes to School practitioners have
found that it is often the smaller projects that can lead to early success, since they do not require
lengthy planning and design phases, and can be integrated into a short program timeline.
Examples include: curb and crosswalk striping, minor repairs, pruning, signage, walkinglbiking
route maps, arrival/departure improvements, bike racks, advanced limit lines, school zone
changes, etc.
Various resources may already be accessible through local and state agencies. If agency staff are
members of the School Team, they may have already offered help with certain projects.
Sometimes it is a matter of the "squeaky wheel getting the grease." Some projects may have
already been planned, but just need to be fast-tracked.
Encouragement
If physical improvements are needed before children can safely walk or bike to school on a
particular route, promote and/or organize fun walking and biking activities before, during or after
school right on the school grounds or tolfrom an area nearby. These events and activities will help
build excitement for walking and biking, so that when physical improvements are completed, there
will be a ready audience of users.
Encouragement events will provide opportunities for students, parents and others to better
understand local conditions, and to experiment with route options. This information can be used to
develop a system of routes which can help define where engineering and enforcement work
should take place. Maps can be created and made public when improvements are made.
Many parent barriers to walking and biking are based on personal safety, convenience and time.
Also, with the rise in childhood obesity, walking and biking to school can be promoted as a
solution to an inactive lifestyle. Encouragement activities are ideal for addressing these issues, in
addition to creating community cohesiveness by bringing parents and neighbors together to help
walk or bike kids to and from school. There is safety in numbers, especially when kids are
accompanied by a trusted parent or other adult volunteer.
Education
Classes or safety events such as bike rodeos, Safety Town, etc. are relatively inexpensive, and
can be provided by school teachers, local volunteers or community groups such as bike clubs or
university students, and by agencies such as police, health and fire departments.
Education events can also encourage students and parents to walk and bike to school.
Safe Routes to School Action Plan, rev 2:2007
Instructions
6
Enforcement
Local police officials who are members of the School Team may be able to provide police
services, or even additional services to help the Safe Routes to School effort. They may also be
able to tell you how to get services from their department, or may advocate for services on behalf
of the School Team.
Police services may not need to be funded through the Oregon Safe Routes to School program,
since they may already have a local dedicated funding source.
Safe Routes to School Action Plan, rev 2:2007
Instructions
7
Routes
Oregon Safe Routes To School
liD
Safe Routes to School:
Creating an Action Plan
Template
Section 1: School information
School name:
Street address:
City:
County:
Type of school:
School district:
o Public school 0 Private school 0 Charter school
School Web site (if any):
Total student enrollment:
Grades served:
Percentage of total enrollment for each grade:
Contact for Action Plan:
E-mail:
Section 2: Forming the School Team
1. Identify the following required key partners for your school team (persons with multiple
affiliations may represent multiple stakeholder groups; see Instructions, Page 1, for details):
. School principal or designated school staff
representative endorsed by the school district:
. A parent who represents or has the
endorsement of a recognized school/parent
organization or site council:
. City or county staff or representative endorsed
by the local road authority:
. Member of the local traffic safety committee
(if one exists):
2. Identify all other participants of the School Team (see Instructions, Page 1, for details):
. School representation:
. Local government representation:
. Community representation:
Safe Routes to School Action Plan, rev 2:2007
Template
8
Section 3: Assessing the modes of student travel
1. Briefly describe the school attendance area. Boundary maps may be available from the school
district or can be downloaded and printed from the school website. If available, please include
as supplemental information (See Instructions, Page 2.):
2. What is the school or the school district policy regarding students' mode of travel to school? Is
there a "preferred method of travel" recommended by the school or the district's pupil
transportation office? Are there any travel modes not allowed? (See Instructions, Page 2):
3. Does the school have a Supplemental Plan in place that allows students to be bused to school
who live within the mile walking distance of the elementary school, or 1.5 miles for the middle
school? If so, what are the health or safety reasons for the Plan? (See Instructions, Page 2):
4. Conduct a Student In-Class Tally during a one-week period. (See Instructions, Page 2.)
D Student In-Class Tally complete. D Electronic file of tabulated tally data copied to
CD for submission to SRTS Program.
From the counts taken in the classrooms, what is the most typical method of travel reported by
the students? What conclusions can be drawn from the numbers?
5. Arrange for the Parent Survey to be sent home to each household. (See Instructions, Page 2.)
D Parent Survey sent to each household. D Electronic file of tabulated Parent Survey data
copied to CD for submission to SRTS Program.
From the responses of the returned Parent Surveys, rank from the highest priority to the lowest
priority the issues that affect parents' decisions to allow, or not allow, their children to walk or
bike tolfrom school.
Safe Routes to School Action Plan, rev 2:2007
Template
9
Optional activity
See Instructions, Page 2, for optional observational information the team may wish to collect.
6. Conduct a walk-about or bike-about with students, parents, neighbors, school staff and other
stakeholders. (See Instructions, Page 3.):
a. What generalizations may be drawn from the information gathered on the "walkability" of
the area around the school site?
b. In what ways does the school promote pedestrian safety?
c. What generalizations may be drawn from the information gathered on the "bikeability" of
the area around the school site?
d. Evaluate the bicycle facilities provided for the students' use:
e. In what ways does the school promote bicycle safety?
Safe Routes to School Action Plan, rev 2:2007
Template
10
7. Invite the local community and/or the School Team to a mapping and brainstorming session for
input on conditions and possible solutions, in addition to helping to determine the best current
and future routes within 2 miles from residential neighborhoods to the school. (See
Instructions, Page 3.):
o Mapping and brainstorming session held. 0 Maps included.
8. Consider on-site issues.
a. Is the arrival/departure zone (for bus, staff and parent autos) designed to allow safe and
convenient bicycling and walking access to the school?
Optional activities
See Instructions, Page 4, for optional information the team may wish to collect.
Section 4: Summarizing the findings
1. List the physical environment barriers and hazards. (See Instructions, Page 4.)
2. List the education/encouragemenUenforcement barriers and hazards.
(See Instructions, Page 4.)
Section 5: Identifying the solutions and making the Action Plan
See Instructions, Pages 4-5, for details on how to complete this section, and consider the "Five E's" in
your response.
A. List the physical improvements and possible strategies for implementation:
Safe Routes to School Action Plan, rev 2:2007
Template
11
B. List the needed safety enforcement/educational/encouragement programs and possible
strategies for improvement:
C. Prioritize the strategies. Assign a time schedule for implementing these strategies. If there are
areas earmarked for improvements, include maps identifying those areas:
Section 6: Submitting the Action Plan
Submit this completed Action Plan Template and all supplemental materials including any optional
collected information, along with the Safe Routes to School Application.
Safe Routes to School Action Plan, rev 2:2007
Template
12
FOR THE RECORD LETTER ON CLOSING GLENN STREET AT THE RAILROAD
CROSSING
I live on upper Willow Street and have done so for 34 years. I and my three children
have traveled this route and have never seen or experienced any safety issues at Glenn
Street crossing. I do not see any valid reason to close this crossing!
I work in Medford and I use Glenn Street as a short connect to North Main at least twice
a day. I consider the railroad crossing on Glenn to be safe as well as convenient - it only
has two lanes of traffic, one each direction and what I would consider reasonable train
vision (I can see the Laurel train crossing from the Glenn crossing). In contrast, the
railroad crossing on Laurel Street has traffic coming from four directions and a diagonal
railroad crossing, so one must look five directions, not considering pedestrians and bikes.
This busy, hectic crossing will become more so if Glenn is closed.
In addition, if Glenn traffic is routed over to Laurel and west onto Hersey to North Main,
it will intersect on North Main almost directly across from Wimer. Wimer is an
extremely busy, dangerous intersection right now, without additional traffic trying to
enter onto North Main from Hersey (my oldest daughter had a car accident trying to pull
out onto North Main from Wimer six years ago).
In contrast, Glenn dead ends on North Main, making it an easy north entrance onto North
Main. Coolidge Street is offset from Glenn on the west and has little traffic - I probably
don't see even one car a month where Coolidge meets North Main, even using this
interchange about 70 times a month (I believe most people use the light on Maple
instead).
If you close Glenn Street, I will use Helman Street and go out Eagle Mill Road. As I
believe others will take the same route, there would be more traffic on Helman Street,
which WILL create a traffic safety problem for students at Helman Elementary School.
There is no safety reason, as stated in Council Communication on the City of Ashland
web page*, to close Glenn and/or Laurel Street crossings, but there is a reason not to
when you consider the safety of students at Helman School. A financial incentive offered
by **ODOT in January of2006 (from Council Communication), does not constitute the
creation of a safety hazard.
When I and all of my neighbors purchased our homes, Glenn Street was (and is) a viable
route. It is not reasonable to allow this northern most area of the city to be built up as it is
(most recently the Billings Ranch area) and now take away the northern most crossing. I
agree with the quote from Council Communication "Perhaps one of the most significant
impacts would be to the local neighborhoods that have historically used the crossings in
their daily trips to and from home.. . these two crossings provide connectivity for the
neighborhood and to Helman School."
Also from Council Communication: "At the conclusion of the diagnostic review,
engineering staff asserted that the Laurel Street crossing closure was not possible and the
Glenn Street crossing closure was unlikely. Certainly the two crossings closures together
would be impossible due to the negative impact on traffic patterns and emergency
response efforts."
I think that Ashland residents/taxpayers deserve the convenience of a direct route to their
home and the security of knowing emergency vehicles have direct and rapid access.
I think that Ashland residents/taxpayers deserve not to have our property value decreased
by the removal of direct access to our property that has existed historically.
I think that Ashland residents/taxpayers deserve more consideration than the financial
incentives and the convenience of ODOT.
=fh-N Y
All Ashland residents should oppose tbeie closing,f; because their favorite crossing could
be next if ODOT Rail Division offers a financial incentive to do so.
~~r-/
--1,/, ~/IL~(~
'/
Sheryl Langhofer
430 Willow Street
Ashland, OR 97520
Quotes:
*From Council Communication on safety, "Whether or not safety would specifically
increase by closing a crossing is not known at this time. Although potential points of
impact between trains and vehicles would certainly decrease on Glenn Street, the traffic
volumes would likely increase at adjacent crossings (Laurel/Hersey primarily). Out of
direction travel and detours required to accommodate crossing closures would likely add
additional elements of potential conflict for traffic."
**Council Communication "In January of2006, ODOT Rail Division further reiterated
their desires to close the Glenn Street crossing and the south leg of the Laurel Street
crossing and offered a financial incentive to do so."
'..
....
....
.....
l IOO? ~"""""'i{ &
~<tilc!l: ~.2 ~O4'1
~@~fJ
243 Eastbrook Way
Ashland, OR 07520
November 19, 2007
Dear City Councilors and Mr. Mayor:
It has come to my attention that there may be a vote occurring soon that would
effectively close the Railroad Crossing at Glenn/Orange Streets and close Laurel Street
just south of the Railroad Crossing.
As I live in what has been called the "cottage district," I will be effected by these
closures and have many concerns.
1. Why was there no official notice given to citizens living in areas that will be most
effected by these closures?
2. What has the Fire Chief and Director of Emergency Services (such as Ambulance
services) said about these closures? (When getting to the scene of an accident or a fire
or the hospital quickly is a matter of life or death, blocked routes would be of major
concern, I would think - have Emergency Services weighed in?)
3. This rearrangement of traffic is not minor and concerns a large number of people
and automobile trips per day; What does the traffic study say? How many more autos
will be traveling the already crowded Helman, Hersey or Oak Streets?
4. What does the Traffic Safety Commission say about this major change in traffic for
so many people?
5. The intersection of Hersey and N. Main is very dangerous; it is very difficult to see
traffic coming from the left if one is trying to turn right onto N. Main and it is extremely
dangerous to attempt a left turn there due to the traffic on N. Main and coming from or
turning onto Wimer itself a very busy street. That intersection is already a disaster
waiting to happen.
6. Many people drive right through the stop sign on Hersey at Helman Street now; I
would expect this to get worse. I have also witnessed people driving through the
parking lot to avoid the stop signs.
7. Why is there even talk about closing Railroad Crossings anyway? I've not heard of
any problems with any of them (other than the one accident at the Wightman crossing)
in over almost 20 years of living here. If it is happening because of the Railroad
requesting it, please be aware that the Central Oregon & Pacific Railroad's parent
company, RailAmerica, "was bought earlier this year by a Boca Raton, Fla., hedge
fund" [citation from Mail Tribune, Nov. 16,2007, page 3A]. Hedge fund company's are
known for looking out mostly for their own bottom line, regardless of how it may be
sugar-coated. U.S. Rep. Peter DeFazio is after the same rail-line regarding the issues
surrounding potentials for reopening their swiftly closed line between Coos Bay and
Eugene. (See attached article.)
Don't trade our traffic safety for whatever is on the table - it is not worth it.
8. Longer routes to drive to get in and out of an area? More expensive gas going
creating more greenhouse gasses? A few streets crowded with cars and trucks?
Backed up traffic? This is what we want in Ashland that is attempting to move toward
being a model "green city?"
Please, councilors and Mr. Mayor, use all of your faculties and leave well enough alone
- Don't close these Railroad Crossings; the costs are far too high.
Sincerely yours,
~~~~.
c:u
=
-..-I
~
C/)
o
o
U
=
o
~
~
c:u
~
U
-..-I
......
..c
=
~
t. U)U)GJ~>'CUGJc. U).1:ls::
pIIIIII . cu cu ~ s:: cu -S 8 - ~ .....
O ~ C. GJ '>.lXl ,g '-':3 .~ .~ ~
.... s:: :l.s::.f:f ~ s:: S'5 !::l ~.....
~ . -. U) CU... GJ 0 0 GJ <0;;;..... c.
~ o-......s::... ~.1:l U) o.s:: c.
c:J c. ~ c:J cu C) GJ ~ ..... >. ~ .....
......C/) ] jj ..... .~ .8 '0 a .s E la E '5
......aGJ~~.....s::GJ c.~'"
c:u .S ~ ~ go ~ If ~:E ~ a c.~
P""'f f ~ u)': GJ GJ Q, ~ a 8 iU''O
pIIIII ~ 0 ~ o~.s ~ d'O '0 ~~
W.' U)'~ 0 c. ~ +' c.~ El: ~ > ~
U)CUGJ:la""GJ_.e ....~....
. :E~ l~'O.~.9'a~j~~~
~ =Q:lCU~~]~GJ..c::l:l::~~
GJ 0: <l'i...cd~.s::c:J !l:GJ
...C/) ~ ~ >.~ ~ '" ~ GJ...!.. 0.i9 GJ
....... ~ :a ~ 0 cu'~ GJ ~.;; ... s:: 1U
\Js:: c:J U) i>> c. t >. Gl '" 'g "'.::
,., 0'0 GJ:=a~U)..c::~"C!l:...
"" ~ 0 .g:g 0 :;; ~* QJ ... C.
O GJO 'Oc:J ~'1i QJ.....,o
...!l: ~ s:: QJ..... ... - 1U l:l '0 s::
t. ... s.: ;>......s,5.2l~.1:l QJ l:l cu
pIIIIII. "'QJ~~'O -i: ~~...",c:J
...... .s..c ~ l:l s:: a; I '" goo cu <Ii::::
- ..... 1i: ~ tn: cu ~ ..... ~ 1U.s ~.s..c
.",., Cd - .... 1llS ~ l:l ..s:: It: ",.; - 5.
"''' 8 QJ 0 ~ '" :l QJ ~ a Co QJ
t. . ~~ cu.....1Z1 ~:l cu..... QJ..c:....
pIIIIII~.9 a '~:3.s c...8 ~ ~ ........]
C/):l "'..... QJ l:I:lGJl:ll:l...
o S ..c: 'O.!!3 U) ; ~.... QJ 0
...... ...: GJ "C ;;: c..~ j!l: '" -g gg.13
C/)~-S~ fa 'o~!l: I EZ:=f c8
CU~ t ~ rh GJ GJ QJ III l:l u:i ~ s:: '
...... 'tj ... 'j GJ..c S l:l p.,..... s:::; 0
..c< It 'Ie~ ~ '0.5 ~'g Ie
~ . U)"'01Z1 S::_gf...~
1 c.'O::l.= cd GJ ... QJ 0
o ~ ~ .s ~.g :; a s.9 b gee.
-..-I ~ :: r4 ~ c. t 51,g ~ e~ ~ ~ ~
...~(- f ::J ": a ~ c. ~ 00 0 U) U) ...
,., , A. I as 8 c. ~ 2 C) _ c:l ... "'.g
"" 1 ... ~... l:l CU'Oc8...c: C1l
~ ~~;('g~.8<.!~~~"'l:la
-~-o GJ~QJ ...QJO...
u IZ1 -... 1ii .s:: ... GJ - ..c.... :l
^ \ 2 ~.~ ~.s:: 0 'g 0 C) '.cq a t: <B
~ .c::Jcu......~OQJGJlXiGJ'"
~ ~1Z1~"'s::~~.9~~aQJ~
~ ~ ~ .s ~ ~ f! .s '(:l J5 E9 ~
'.
QJ~'QJO~ ..."""'_:>...
.1:l GJ == ..Ill .... 0 l:Q: ~ 'lIS
~U)Scd~ S::~'t:i.s::GJ
::: ~.- a ~ 0 GJ.........~..c
GJ .~ ~~ ...... .... '" GJ s:::
U)U).....,o~.1:l CUc:JU)"'",
~~~""'" - ~ >. '" 0 cu c:J
..s en;:::J:: CI,) ...... g'''' >.
GJO...~ GJGJ
~ C. U) c:J.... .S ~ . ,!d .1:l ~
sO QJ- -"C-~
'" - GJ..Ill GJ c:J'> GJ.s:: as
~ 0 GJ ~ <Il.1:l s::: GJ 0 Q.c:J ...
'" c:J s::- ....~....._...: t:: '"
o GJ:::: ...~o GJ '" c.o Coa;:> >.
c:J.1:lGJ"'.....NS l:lc:Jii>GJ
QJ ~ -s GJ ~..... 0 ~.... '!=::..8 -s
.9.9 >. >. ~ '0 Ql "C t; !II
QJ ..... 1ii t '" ... = rn.s ~ ca '3
c:J~.1:l c.C.0 GJ GJ ~ c:J c:J'I:::.
....~ ~ ~s::.c:"";':::"'GJS
c8 GJ s:: s:: "''O.....~ GJ..c-s:: ~
s::ooQJ.....S- .....:lOoQJ
s:::: :tl::::.s ~ GJ .S c.'O c..9
o ......!. '0 >. GJ GJ a.... ... .!13
.....GJ.....cu ..c-S"'oocu
~~S8 't:l tl:tl1::.9.g
farniq==. QJ:;;:fGJ~If~~:;:l
:>GJ.....'" .....-.1:l"t; ..........c.
ii> ..... ~... . U) :l ~ 0 ca s::: - 0
o 't:l GJ GJ QJ ~QJ..... ~ C. l:l '" GJ ""
.!!3 ..c'~ -S .1:l .S GJ 'g U) 0 C.s -S .s
cu ~- 'Oo~:;:l ...
>.:l iU'''' QJ U) :l"';.. '" 0 s::~
QJU)cb~.sU)c:l==t-IS~~",
~ .s GJ ~ l:l ....S f.... QJ.9 '0 '0
.;s'O>.0:g c:J0~ 0.....
= U) o::l U) ~ ==-~ = ,.:;;j ] ~ ~
.g l:l ... cu ~ '" CU'(:l QJ l:l '" ... 0
::l.... ~~ :l 0 C. C. '" ~ ~ >.......;:3
'::ll:liii - sp., QJClfGJcu
1:1 o!!! .~ QJ'O s:: 0'" i:Q -S r.,
~..... ~ ..c: c:J 0 U) GJ
'<liS ~ S ~E-< GJ'= ~QJ 8:E'Q
0-a~::::rn ofi::Jo.9urn
....
....
....
....
[IIllll (~"""""'i.( &
f~Al . 2' 104'
"J!J1:Q@~/
243 Eastbrook Way
Ashland, OR 07520
November 19, 2007
Dear City Councilors and Mr. Mayor:
It has come to my attention that there may be a vote occurring soon that would
effectively close the Railroad Crossing at Glenn/Orange Streets and close laurel Street
just south of the Railroad Crossing.
As I live in what has been called the "cottage district," I will be effected by these
closures and have many concerns.
1. Why was there no official notice given to citizens living in areas that will be most
effected by these closures?
2. What has the Fire Chief and Director of Emergency Services (such as Ambulance
services) said about these closures? (When getting to the scene of an accident or a fire
or the hospital quickly is a matter of life or death, blocked routes would be of major
concern, I would think - have Emergency Services weighed in?)
3. This rearrangement of traffic is not minor and concerns a large number of people
and automobile trips per day; What does the traffic study say? How many more autos
will be traveling the already crowded Helman, Hersey or Oak Streets?
4. What does the Traffic Safety Commission say about this major change in traffic for
so many people?
5. The intersection of Hersey and N. Main is very dangerous; it is very difficult to see
traffic coming from the left if one is trying to turn right onto N. Main and it is extremely
dangerous to attempt a left turn there due to the traffic on N. Main and coming from or
turning onto Wimer itself a very busy street. That intersection is already a disaster
waiting to happen.
6. Many people drive right through the stop sign on Hersey at Helman Street now; I
would expect this to get worse. I have also witnessed people driving through the
parking lot to avoid the stop signs.
7. Why is there even talk about closing Railroad Crossings anyway? I've not heard of
any problems with any of them (other than the one accident at the Wightman crossing)
in over almost 20 years of living here. If it is happening because of the Railroad
requesting it, please be aware that the Central Oregon & Pacific Railroad's parent
company, RailAmerica, "was bought earlier this year by a Boca Raton, Fla., hedge
fund" [citation from Mail Tribune, Nov. 16,2007, page 3A]. Hedge fund company's are
known for looking out mostly for their own bottom line, regardless of how it may be
sugar-coated. U.S. Rep. Peter DeFazio is after the same rail-line regarding the issues
surrounding potentials for reopening their swiftly closed line between Coos Bay and
Eugene. (See attached article.)
Don't trade our traffic safety for whatever is on the table - it is not worth it.
8. Longer routes to drive to get in and out of an area? More expensive gas going
creating more greenhouse gasses? A few streets crowded with cars and trucks?
Backed up traffic? This is what we want in Ashland that is attempting to move toward
being a model "green city?"
Please, councilors and Mr. Mayor, use all of your faculties and leave well enough alone
- Don't close these Railroad Crossings; the costs are far too high.
Sincerely yours,
~~~~~.
;" ~ CJ) ~. 8" ~ = ::t. 8" i -t ....-t
~g-a~~pt~~g~"1j~; v
~(tl::d(tl(tlO~~'"i~'--<r '"
0' (") S ~ C'i 0 ~ 0 ::dU:=. ~ lS \ ~
E::t.~~_~_~~~9~n ~
~. 0 (tl ,. ,. p (tl 0 L,-'
s::S '"i g ~~ g->8'Iii~ t;:'t"'.l;~
S ~O' ~ ~ ::s ..... '"i X S? \ Co f'\ "
o' ~ '"i (") - C'i ~ (tl 't:l g!ll "'II' ,..
'"i '" '" 0" 0 0 S .g ~ s' c: ~ -)
~ g-~~i ~qm ~~ ~ ~:: 1S.~.
'g. s ~ pt g ~: g-~ ~ ::d 0
~ 'g ~ (tl ~ t"'.l g ;:::: ~,g
~~~[~ g~~~~~ ~cr
o ~ ::s .... ~ m S' ~ (tl e: ft ~ I-"-'
::s ~ ~ ::s I (tl (tl (tl Cf '< '"i :.~
0'~g.8'~1 ~~g, ~g:pt~t/)
= 0 ::s::S .... ~o ....'t:l > ~ (tl (tl ,"~,....
'"i't:l p..~ <l ~ ~ '" rt/)
o (tl ..... ~ '" tii' g. ~ 8" 0 Q
~::s ::s (tl to '" (tl .... ~ S = \:,
g:;~ ~g g">g ~[O:!1g pt...it-t
'"i (tl't:l S ~ .e '"i ,-, ~ ~ < (") f'\"
"g _~. ~ ::d'S'm g e g g,~ ~ g ,...
... .... '"i ~ ~ ..... ~ (tl~' '" tn .......
~::s",(tl~(tl ::S~::!'n) ~,.......
;:::~ ~ ~ g ~ I ~ ::s ::s (tl ~ g; I-"-'
(")~'"i~. ::!.::d~~0'Cl:-(tl~ ..... I
~::s (tl ~"1j;'~ =-....~ !'I ~ ~
::S~::S~_'"i....(tl::S~ ~'"i 0
p.. (tl ~~::;::(")~ o(tl
't:l :+ (tl ~~ g::;- g ;; go 0 -< f'\"
'"i~~t.:l~",;:>;:>~(tl ~o ,..
<' ~ ~ ~ (tl '< ~ 't:l ~ '" g. ::s p.
~::s ;:> ,eo (tl .... ~ 0 ~ .... ~
~ ~ ~ ....u.. ~ (")::s ~ 't:l;:r
(tl '" 0 'i" (tl '"i ~ ~ 7''< '" (tl t/)~
t-t
('Q
~
('Q
t/)
,....
~
t-t
~
6-
~:
n
=r'
('Q
~
o
=:1
n
o
o
t/)
~:
=
('Q
~~ g.g;>~8"C?~g m
g.a~!~~~(tl~O'Cl::;-i~
~ ....dQ (tl S I: ~ "'0 ~ ........
'" _ (tl ....... 0 ~ 0'Cl "-J (tl
~;:ll'"i..~==(tl'"15=(tl~'"
~ < g . S o.'t:l .... ::s 't:l 0 ~. '"
~ ~ p.. ~p ~ :;~ 0 J;l 0 g-
o~g S~"e.(tl(tl:",~~
S:'t:l ~ !::s: (tl d' ~ = ~ s:....
(tl~P dQ;o ....'t:lP ::s
'"i 't:l (tl~....,::l-<l(tlS~~
(") ~ ~ ~Oo g''i' ....g=-
~ (tl '< ~ 0 '"i"'" ::!. ::s :ft
.... ~ .... ~ (tl C'i II' (") IiQ 't:l (")
:g ~ 0 ",;:r~ 0 ~ ~.... - 0
""" ........, (") (tl::s 0 ~~ '"
::;.'t:l;:::l ~ S Vl ~ ~ = ::s r+
...._ (") ~..,., (tl-
0'Cl.... ~ 0 to . ~"" ~
.... ~ e. ~ '"i ~ ::I 0'Cl ~ ~ >-
::S;:'-Vl 't:l(tl~,<~~Vl'"
VlC'i!:}t:lC:st Vl::::;:llS~
t:l,a8 (tl,g S.(tl ~~ g ~ ~Ol
(tl "'0 O(")~Vl '<::::=
"1j:;to'"i~::SO(tl::O:!(tlSS
~ (tllll (tl "tlS -.... ~........
~. .... '< O'ClO ~ 't:l 't:l 0 S '"i .... ==
O'"i~ (tl(") ~Vl..Vl::S""
'" 0'Cl ::s ::s ::s ....! ::l- ~ e. 8" 0
~ 0 ~ t::' ~::no<::s - ~ ;:s
....O~::;.O(") (tl0'<~~~
~ ~ ;:.- (tl ...., '"i S' '"i ::s ~ (tl ft
~ Vl (tl 9 ~~. (") '" :;;:r t:l' (tl
g'gglll~~8""'(tl~~~'<
~~S::t::sg~g""'":~~~e.
(tl ~'t:l 0 '" ~ (tl 0'Cl S ;:'-;:r~. Vl
'"i (tl ~ ::S't:l. ....(tl (tl (tl (tl ~O
o _::S e. 0 ~ 1jj Vl' '"i"*.... ~
't:l ........ :l ;:r (tl ~ ~..... (tl ~
~::S(t)"tlll)(t)-(tl ~t.nVlt:'
O' (t) '" 0 ..... '" ,!""> ~ '"i 0 ~
::s' !:} ~ O' Iii ~ 0 S < "*
.... III 0 ::s .....;:r ~ ~ ~ (tl .....
'" ~....,. (tl (tl '< _, '"i 0
!:}'t:l ~'t:l S' (tl ~ pt::::::t:::: 8"
(tl 0 0 =..... . S .... (tl 0 0 ::s
~ ~ t:'. g: (tl ...3.... ~ ~ ::s ::s !Il 0'
;:> (tl ~ .... '"i ::r t:'. P ~ '"i
'~::l:,(") (") ~ (tl (tl O't:l't:l ;:r::iS(")
= a Vl s;t '" a '"i III ~ ~ .... (tl
_ (tl'"(tl '< ~~~
:d~ ~Vl '<~=-;:.-
st~ 0 .... ::;. 'S2 0 ~.;; (tl ~ ~ (tl
(tl (").... ,. S N ~ ,. =- (")
'< ~JIl't:l.g ~ (tl8"l'1::::(tl 0
~ ::1. ~ '"1 _....!"t.... ~::S (") S
'"i(")t:l~(tl;:s;:r$l:l~(tl0't:l
!Il ~ (tl .... (") (tl:or (tl - ~ $l:l
....~_ _tD 0 P ...
~ ~ "-J .... (tl .... .... (") Vl 't:l l::.
<:;;:'-$l:lt:'~ t:'S+0(t)~~
(tl ~ ~.0'Cl ~ (tl ~ = Vl ::s ~
(") $l:l 0 ~ '< ~ t:l-"*~ 0
~'"1"'(")~ =-(tl~""'Vl~
JIl ~. ::1. ~ 3"1j S t.n ~ ==
g'~p..g::s =~~SVl~
ll> 9 . $l:l 0 0'Cl.... ::0;" .... ~ ~
t-t-<:~"""c.-t" ~O('D'l'I('D
~ B9rbara E;,~d~!~,I)~fl.:JC9m.!!,!~I}Uo _th~_s~I1El,ILglosure of ~~~urel~'!!]~LGl~!lI1LQr?I)Jle_~r~~t, ,',
, "'~, ~~g,~~l
From:
To:
Date:
Subject:
"Barbara Christensen" <christeb@ashland,or.us>
<comment_to _the _ cou ncil@listashland,or.us>
11/20/200711 :35:42 AM
[CommenUo_the_council] Closure of Laurel and Glenn/Orange Street
To the Ashland City Council:
We disagree strongly with the proposal to close both Laurel and Glenn/Orange street to accommodate the
ODOT-rail system, We believe that this idea will make driving much more hazardous, The light at Laurel
is the safest way to enter and exit from the south of main, We do not want to see the entire neighborhood
'ghettoized' by closing off the safest and most oft used routes, Orange street is very narrow and already
heavily trafficked with speeders, We ask that you do not increase the danger on the street with this foolish
idea! !!
Safety? Let ODOT pay for the proper warning signals at the crossings instead of locking hundreds of
families into a pattern of few entrances and exits, In our view the most dangerous aspect of this is not the
crossings but the fact that at Laurel the east stop-sign is set so far back that Laurel drivers cannot see the
oncoming traffic.
Respectfully, Marianne Strong and Harvey Rupp, 191 Orange (at Laurel)
CommenUo_the_council mailing list
CommenUo _the _ council@listashland,or.us
http://Iistashland,or.us/mailman/listinfo/comment_ to_the _council
Barbara Christensen - FW: For the Record: Glenn St. Public hearin /vote 11-20-7
Pa e 1
From:
To:
Date:
Subject:
Bodin <aloranne@opendoor.com>
<christeb@ashland.or.us>
11/20/20074:08:56 PM
FW: For the Record: Glenn St. (Public hearing/vote 11-20-7)
From: Bodin <aloranne@opendoor.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 200716:03:43 -0800
To: <commenUo _the _ council@lists.ashland.or.us>
Subject: For the Record: Glenn St. (Public hearing/vote 11-20-7)
To the Council and Mayor:
In lieu of my attendance at the 11-20-07 Public Hearing and Council vote,
this letter represents my views concerning the ODOT Rail proposal for
closures of Laurel at Hersey Streets and Orange at Glenn Streets. These
have been major arterial streets commonly used for access to N. Main linkage
with primary destinations such as Douwntown or 1-5, as well as surrounding
businesses, hospital, medical facilities, etc.
Knowledge that current traffic problems and likely ones to arise in the
future are based on the following factors:
1. Helman School has increased its student population considerably with its
absorption of youngsters from the recent closure and changes in other
elementary schools adding to the vehicular usage of Helman St.
2. Helman Street has had incrementally extensive traffic in recent years
and its usage continues to grow continually.
3. Impending subdivisions at the Helman Springs and Ashland Greenhouse
properties will add a further need for usuage of Helman, as well as Oak,
Laurel and Glenn Streets and, in turn, will compound the current traffic
problems.
4. An increased size of Helman School with planned additions of an
extensive library (5,010 square feet) and gym (6,400 square feet) are
likely to require more access for additional cars to use the key
thoroughfares because larger capacity in these facilities will likely draw
more community activities. Hence, more traffic on Helman, Laurel, Glenn.
Summing up, clearly not only is increased traffic a serious issue, but the
safety factors need to be heavily analyzed with the intended redirection of
traffic imposed should street closures occur. As they exist now, Laurel at
Orange intersections are not a straight configuration, and should access be
redirected, this poses a greater traffic safety issue for drivers who will
be required to use diversion streets due to closures.
When this proposal was first evaluated in March, 2006, both Paula Brown and
Jim Olson stated that the design would not improve safety. The Council vote
was 5 to 1 against closures and recommendations were made to improve both
crossings. ODOT subsequently offered to pay the City improvement costs of
$400,000 to improve Oak Street crossings predicated on a closure of Glenn.
This would be a very unwise trade-off.
Barbara Christensen - FW: For the Record: Glenn St. Public hearin Ivote 11-20-7
Pa e2
A re-visit of this proposal requires the same sound judgment made initially.
As a resident of this area, I join with others who urge that you vote
against the proposed street closures for the reasons listed.
Thank you.
Anne Bodin
Ashland
n - For The RecorcE"Glenn Street
Pa e 1
From:
To:
Date:
Subject:
"Chris Bird" <chbird@mind.net>
"Ashland City Councilors" <comment_to_the_council@lists.ashland.or.us>
11/19/2007 9:27:25 AM
For The Record: Glenn Street
Dear City Councilors:
This is to let you know that we strongly support Art Bullock's position regarding denying the proposal to
close both the Glen/Orange Street and Laurel/Hersey Street railway crossings to vehicular traffic.
Not only do we agree with all the arguments he puts forward, but we will add that, we being transplants to
Ashland since May 2000, find it quite difficult to direct people, i.e. friends, family, contractors, service
personnel, etc., to our place and this will only make it that much more difficult!
With Ashland's growth, not only do we need to maintain current access routes, but we need to be adding
new routes and expanding/improving current access ones to ensure a continued "quality of life" that drew
us here to Ashland in the first place!
We implore you to consider the special place that Ashland is and that you, as City Councilors, have the
duty to us, your constituency, to ensure maintenance of that subjective citizenry interface with your
personal actions.
By copy of this message to Barbara Christensen, we are documenting our request to pre-register our
street address with her as City Recorder so that we can communicate directly with the City Councilors.
Sincerely,
Christopher H. Bird
Erika M. Bird
426 Parkside Drive
Ashland, Oregon 07520-1163
cc: "Erika Bird" <embird@mind.net>, "Art Bullock" <OfThePeopleEditor@yahoo.com>,
"Barbara Christensen" <christeb@ashland.or.us>
^ ~ar:~a<ra'Christensen :" Com!)Jent toHle_coundlf2iIhe:~~~()r~:J~u"r~L~t~I2sin <~hg G]~Dn St~i~:;>,i~ "aEe b().th on thEPa
From: Art Bullock <ashlandconstitution@yahoo.com>
To: <comment_to _the_council@list.ashland.or.us>
Date: 11/19/200710:03:41 PM
Subject: [Comment_to_the_council] For The Record: Laurel St closing and Glenn St closing are
both on the agenda
From:
http://Iist.ashland.or.us/pipermaillcomment_to_the_counciIl2007-November/000539.html
"For the record, the hearing tomorrow night is a proposal to close the Glenn Street Crossing to
automobile and truck traffic (leaving it open for bicycles and pedestrians) and to fully improve all four legs
of the Hersey/Laurel crossing....
According to the packet, that's not the only option on the table. (See below.)
"There will be no discussion about closing Laurel Street."
To the contrary, Council Communication Packet shows the Laurel-Hersey crossing is clearly on the
agenda. ODOT-Rail requires that both closings be considered together. Packet further shows that
ODOT-Rail has ordered both crossings closed, and that council will consider "compliance with the ODOT
order to close one leg of this crossing" (Laurel at Hersey). [emphasis added]
http://www.ashland.or.us/Files/CounciL Commun ication _Glen n_ St. pdf
Packet Sections With History And Current Hearing Background
...The City has approached the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) Rail Division
for a permit to improve the Hersey / Laurel Street crossing, the next on the priority list....
The review team consisted of three persons from ODOT, three Central Oregon & Pacific Railroad
(CORP) employees and three City staff members. ODOT and CORP were unanimous in their
recommendation that the Glenn Street crossing must be considered with the Hersey/Laurel crossing and
that the Glenn Street crossing be closed to vehicular traffic. It was further recommended that the south leg
of the Laurel Street also be closed....
In January of 2006, ODOT Rail Division further reiterated their desires to close the Glenn Street
crossing and the south leg of the Laurel Street crossing and offered a financial incentive to do so....
LAUREL STREET CLOSURE
The Rail Division also recommended the closure of the south leg of the Laurel Street crossing. That
crossing is currently a standard 4-leg intersection with Laurel Street running north-south and Hersey Street
running east-west with the railroad crossing at a 50 degree angle through the center of the intersection.
The closure of the south leg of Laurel Street would create a Tee intersection with Laurel Street
southbound traffic being able to access Hersey Street in either direction but not able to continue south.
Northbound Laurel Street traffic would be completely blocked at Hersey Street. The Rail Division offered
to provide $100,000 to assist in the improvement of this intersection if the Laurel Street south leg
connection was eliminated....
Approximately $150,000 could be saved from the Hersey / Laurel Street crossing by eliminating one
automatic crossing gate and remain in compliance with the ODOT order to close one leg of this
crossing....
Summary
ODOT has the authority to close a highway at-grade rail crossing. They can do so on their own initiative
(see related policy details). They can also act on the recommendation of the road authority to close a
particular crossing or simply require that if one crossing is to be improved another must be closed.
...At this point the City could request the crossing remain open for pedestrian and bicycle activities and
may be able to gain full improvements to the Hersey / Laurel crossing without an added burden of closing
one leg. If the City initiates the closure of Glenn Street, the City may also be in a good position to request
consideration as a "credit" for the ultimate desire for the Fourth Street crossing as there are no current
street crossing between Oak and N Mountain.
;Barb~~ra~c,6!i.sten~~.n - C2mm~"6f.".to' th~ COlJDgi.!J"E~r_th~B.~.9~~~:'b~.lJn:I SI~19~iD..~t~n~:~~n,6'~t:9!~~Lr19.~.~~:~~!h.~rLth~~~
Council Options:
1. ...Request that staff proceed with written requests to ODOT Rail Division to allow full improvements to
the Laurel! Hersey crossing without partial closures...
2. Reject the idea of limiting the use of the Glenn Street Railroad crossing and makes no motion to
initiate limitations on Glenn Street. This would place the decision to close the rail crossing at Glenn Street
squarely on ODOT Rail Division and allow them to proceed with the closure at their discretion.... This
option might also preclude full operation and improvements at the Laurel! Hersey Crossing.
---------------------------------
Get easy, one-click access to your favorites. Make Yahoo! your homepage.
Christensen:"Comment"to "the councnFor..!h~.B.~99~~':cIari~ii"1'''~~con.fu'sionI~:~!afF~gg~..n~iI.f.9m~upic~tion~Eit:
From: Art Bullock <ashlandconstitution@yahoo.com>
To: <comment_to _the _ council@list.ashland.or.us>
Date: 11/19/200710:39:56 PM
Subject: [Comment_to_the_council] For The Record: Clarifying confusion in staffs Council
Communication Packet
From:
http://Iist.ashland.or.us/pipermail/commenUo_the_council/2007-November/000539.html
"There seems to be some confusion..."
Indeed there is, and it comes from staffs Council Communication Packet.
http://www.ashland.or.us/Files/CounciL Communication_ Glenn_ St. pdf
"Council's 2006 Decision
Due to being faced with the impacts of two potential railroad crossing closures, Council rejected ODOT's
offer for financial assistance and elected to proceed with the improvement application process. Council
suggested that the option to close Glenn Street be kept open."
To correct this "stacked deck" confusion, read the 2006Apr4 minutes:
http://ashland.or.us/Agendas.asp?Display=Minutes&AMI 0=2579
"2. Consideration of Suggested At-Grade Railroad Crossing Closures.
City Engineer Jim Olson explained that the Public Works Department has embarked on a fairly aggressive
program to improve five of the nine at grade railroad crossings, and part of that process includes the
approval and order from ODOT Rail Division for the changes. Mr. Olson stated that the City has brought
on a Consulting Engineer to assist with this project and they have submitted a proposed permit to ODOT
Rail for the improvement of the Hersey/Laurel and Glenn Street crossings. He explained that ODOT Rail's
stated goal is to reduce the number of at grade rail crossings in Oregon and they have recommended the
City close the Glenn Street crossing to vehicular traffic and close the Laurel Street leg of the
Laurel/Hersey crossing. Staff does not agree with this recommendation, but since ODOT Rail countered
with a proposed where they provide financial incentive for performing these closures, Staff is requesting
direction from the Council....
Councilor Amarotico/Hartzell m/s to reject the offer presented by ODOT Rail Division and to proceed with
the process of improving the Glenn Street and Hersey/Laurel Street crossings.... Voice Vote: Councilor
Hardesty, Hartzell, Amarotico, Jackson and Silbiger, YES. Councilor Chapman, NO. Motion passed 5-1."
Note that both crossings were to be improved. Neither crossing was to be closed.
Yet for some reason the 2007Nov20 packet claims "Council suggested that the option to close Glenn
Street be kept open." This is simply untrue. Council made no such suggestion.
Council only decides (or suggests) with a majority vote. There was no vote "that the option to close
Glenn Street be kept open." So council didn't suggest it. If council didn't suggest it, who did?
When people learn of issues as in the 2007Nov20 packet, they repeatedly ask "Who's behind this?"
Combining the 2007Nov20 packet with the 2006Apr4 minutes enables them to answer their question.
2007Nov20 Packet: "Council suggested that the option to close Glenn Street be kept open."
2006Apr4 Minutes: [The entire Discussion section on the above motion:] "DISCUSSION: Councilor
Jackson suggested that they keep this option open."
We hoped we'd entered an era where staff relied on the simple truth rather than trying to revise and
misrepresent history to fit a politically correct recommendation of the present.
Alas, that was not to be.
F.o~,f6,ew~eC2.~~,:.".9J.~rih'.in .,...co~f~sI<?~]!1'stafE~..~()y~~ir9~!!i~,uni~ation'
Be a better sports nut! Let your teams follow you with Yahoo Mobile. Try it now.
L_u_uu_ -;-;- -;.;..- u """,.X',,~', .;,...U ,',<,",,":0:"';':<':"".-'.; _.uu___;_;_,_^_:_,,,.U,;.-;~ ......~'^',W>>.% ):"_'.,:'.::"_ ___V;...;_;_;~;. - ":",;:',,,,:'~<,<',,' ..... ":. "'d-<W'<. u __u_;___u_____x_;_,,,,..,X-_ .' _ ,_u_;_;_;_;;;_;~- ",~. .' ~ '.'^ ,_ u_;_;_;;;;;;;;;;;;X;_;_,,'. :.',' '" " ':,,",'~':"':_"u" ..,~. "". ._;_.__""."', ,"',', ,'0 , ","',;~____ _, ..... ,''''-''~
,~~r,~ara"gbristen~~n - Com'!l~n!.Jg the_co!:m.~II] Eor The R"~.~9rd,: C~!-!r:!~il,,~b2rt~!-!tsgut~!ytll1ii ~~n<:lIr,~ffi~~1ii!~!ic;~~~g~I
From:
To:
Date:
Subject:
Safety Cmsn
Art Bullock <ashlandconstitution@yahoo"com>
<comment_to _the _ council@list.ashland.or.us>
11/19/200710:59:00 PM
[Comment_to_the_council] For The Record: Council shortcuts Quiet Village and Traffic
On 2006Apr4, council voted against closing Glenn or Laurel because of the impact on neighborhood
safety and traffic flow. The vote was 5-1, with only Chapman voting against the motion to improve both,
and close neither. http://ashland.or.us/Agendas.asp?Oisplay=Minutes&AMIO=2579
"Councilor Chapman...stated that the Glenn Street closure is worth considering, but would not want to do
so before consulting the neighbors."
Since then, there has been no "consulting the neighbors". No open neighborhood meetings. No notice
letters. Not even a hearing at Traffic Safety Cmsn.
City should have referred this matter to Traffic Safety Commission and held meeetings IN the
neighborhood at Helman Elementary School to find out what the neighbors think of the closing of Glenn St
(or Laurel St).
Instead, Paula Brown and Jim Olson skipped Traffic Safety Cmsn entirely. TSC was negative on this
identical design in 2006, with one commirssioner calling it a "bribe".
City scheduled the current hearing for 2 days before Thanksgiving, knowing that many neighbors would
be gone or unable to attend.
Mayor then declined to decide in advance that the hearing would be kept open so those gone that week
could provide testimony when they returned from holiday travel.
2006Apr4: "Councilor Jackson commented on the need to provide an immediate response to OOOT
Rail. She noted that funding these safety improvements is a big issue in Ashland, however at this point
she does not feel there is enough information about the traffic and circulation impacts these closures
would create."
No information about traffic and circulation was added to the packet beyond 19 months ago, yet here
the item is again on the agenda, with no additional information to or from the neighborhood.
Council should require:
1. Neighborhood meetings to discuss this matter at Helman Elementary School. This is a major
neighborhood issue.
2. Traffic Safety Cmsn to recommend whether closing Glenn St (or Laurel St) would improve safety
overall for Quiet Village.
3. A thorough study of current and future traffic flow given 3 (!) new subdivisions: Billings (72 homes),
Helman Springs (18 homes), and Ashland GreenhousesNerde Village (68? homes).
4. Close coordination with the current planning for revised traffic flow at Helman Elementary as part of
the building program.
Be a better pen pal. Text or chat with friends inside Yahoo! Mail. See how.
[E3.afb~:r~...f]![~!~Q!~I~]CoiT!m~5r.I2]6i:s(.unciiII?1~!i5:~t:f~2is1~g~:::"",':':':,:w...' .. ,..::,::.:.::.:::::..........:.::.:...:..:::.. .:':::::'::::...
E:~geIl
From:
To:
Date:
Subject:
<webcomment@ashland.or.us>
<comment_to _the _ council@list.ashland.or.us>
11/19/2007 9: 11:42 PM
[Comment_to_the_council] Glenn St. crossing
I am writing to voice my STRONG opposition to closing Glenn St. Many people use this route everyday
and closing it would cause more traffic on nearby streets and increase the time emergency vehicles get to
some homes.
Comment_to_the_council mailing list
Comment_to _the _ council@list.ashland.or.us
http://list.ashland.or.us/mailman/listinfo/commenUo _the _ cou ncil
Alleged Bias For Kate Jackson
Art Bullock, 2007Nov20
Under Oregon law, the hearing to close Glenn
St-Orange St at the railroad crossing, and/or close the
Laurel St at Hersey St crossing, is a quasi-judicial
decision, which requires unbiased decision-makers. This
document alleges actual bias for Kate Jackson and asks
that she be recused. Jackson has repeatedly
demonstrated personal bias against the author, a party
in this matter. Jackson has also demonstrated
prejudgment bias. Under Oregon law, Jackson's bias
requires recusal. If she fails to recuse herself, the other
councilors are asked to recuse her by roll call vote.
1. Recusal due to personal bias.
Jackson shows personal animosity, yelling at the
author repeatedly in public during canvassing, spreading
false information, making personal attacks, and working
to discredit me. Jackson's personal bias against the
author means she is not an impartial decisionmaker for
this action, where the author is a party.
The author is publisher and editor of a newspaper
called ...Of The People. The spring 2007 edition
(attached) reported on the first page, above the fold, that
Jackson as councilor, moved to put on the ballot a
charter granting council the power to sell Lithia Park.
This means Jackson, recently elected with major
financial contributions from developers, would have the
power to sell part or all of Lithia Park to a developer if
joined by 3 other council votes.
After this publication, Jackson viciously and
personally attacked this editor, including public attacks of
yelling at the author on the street while she canvassed to
get her charter version passed.
On Sat 2007 Apr24, while this author distributed the
newspaper to Quiet Village, Jackson came to the
neighborhood. She saw the author at an intersection,
and yelled at the author across the intersection in an
angry, hostile tone of voice. Saying nothing, the author
crossed the street and moved to another street.
Jackson then came to the street the author had
moved to. When she arrived, to avoid conflict, the
author stopped on the other side of the street, waiting for
her to complete her drop of flyers promoting the charter
version that would give her and 3 others the power to
sell Lithia Park to developers. She continued her verbal
harassment , though the author was on the other side of
the street, houses away. She would drop her flyers, and
as she returned to the street between each house, would
yell angrily at the author across the street, taunting the
author as if to provoke a conflict, yelling that the author
was going to pick up her flyers, etc.. Through all her
yelling and provocation, the author said nothing, and
resumed the work after she left.
The streets where she yelled and provoked the author
were those directly by the Laurel-Hersey closing.
On Sun 2007 Apr25, the author RSVP'd to the host of
a meeting on the ballot measures, who invited the author
to attend the session at his home. When I arrived, he
said Jackson told them the author was following her,
though she failed to explain that she arrived on a street
where the author was already distributing my paper. She
said she didn't want the author to speak to the visitors.
The author was allowed to listen to her many false
comments about the charter ballot measures, and wasn't
allowed to speak. She used her fear tactics to stop a
dissenting voice to her factually incorrect comments.
She didn't mention that she had repeatedly yelled at the
author on the street, though the author had said nothing.
Jackson was working for a PAC (Political Action
Committee) called Committee For Responsible
Government, which advocated support for one or both
ballot measures. She actively used PAC-paid materials
to do her work.
After working to prevent the truth about the ballot
measures from coming out, Jackson proceeded to use
taxpayer-paid resources to attack the author by name on
City's listserve, falsely claiming that the author was using
fear tactics. She twisted the situation 1800. The author's
newspaper properly reported factual information about
her motion, her vote, and her proposed power shift from
the voters to her and 3 other council members.
While relying on the PAC to support her work,
Jackson violated the law by using government resources
and City's listserve to personally attack the author with
false information, and advocate for her cause, using her
position in the government and taxpayer resources for
her personal agenda. Taxpayers voted against
Jackson-sponsored charter 77-23% and voted against
the Jackson-supported city manager charter amendment
62-38%.
Summary. Jackson spread false rumors and false
information, and acted to prevent the author from
factually correcting her repeated misinformation about
the ballot measures she campaigned for. She used her
political position, PAC material, and taxpayer resources
in City government to personally attack and discredit the
author. Jackson is not an impartial decision maker.
Because of her personal bias against the author, she
should be recused.
2. Recusal due to prejudgment bias.
Jackson also shows prejudgment bias, which is
separate and cumulative grounds for recusal. Jackson
told the Mountain Meadows Democrats meeting on the
charter (2007 Apr24) that she ignored the Ashland
Charter because it was out of date, and gave the group
a specific section that she ignored. She laughed at the
current charter, claiming it wasn't a working document.
Ashland Charter requires that Jackson swear to an
oath of office that she will uphold the Ashland Charter,
as well as the constitutions of State or Oregon and the
United States of America. Yet she maintains, in public,
that she ignores the Ashland Charter because it's
outdated. This is a violation of her oath of office.
We are a nation of laws. Instead of laughing at the
Ashland Charter, she's required by oath to uphold it,
whether or not she agrees with it.
Jackson's public position that she ignores the Ashland
Charter because it's outdated is prejudgment bias
because it shows she's willing to violate her oath of
office.
Three other key issues related to closing Glenn St
and/or Laurel St (3-5 below) show that Jackson has
avoided direct application of applicable law, which shows
prejudgment bias.
3. Jackson's failure as appointing authority.
As councilor, Jackson is Paula Brown's appointing
authority. Brown is required by Oregon law to disclose
all conflicts of interest in Nevada LID, yet Jackson fails to
require her to do so. City admitted in writing, as found
by Jackson County Circuit Court, that Jackson knew of 8
financial conflicts of interest for Brown. As Brown's
appointing authority, Jackson is required by law to
dispose of Brown's conflicts of interest after disclosure,
and has failed to do so, damaging the author and others
in the majority who opposed Brown's proposal for
Nevada LID, and now the closing of Glenn St and/or
Laurel S1.
4. Jackson's email to Brown.
In Nevada LID, Jackson refused to stop the personal
attacks from city staff, instead writing that she was angry
at those who attacked staff, when the facts showed the it
was staff attacking the neighbors. Her email showed
undisclosed ex parte contact, personal bias, twisting of
the facts 1800, and prejudgment bias.
5. Summary.
The evidence shows Jackson's actual bias, personal
animosity and personal bias, and prejudgment bias in
her willingness to ignore city law when she chooses.
She personally and repeatedly attacked the author in
public streets, on City's Iistserve, and in a meeting to
discuss her charter version that would give her and 3
others the power to sell Lithia Park to developers. She
has put forth false information and false facts to attack
the author rather than address her legal responsibilities
to dispose of 8 conflicts of interest, all known to
Jackson, for Public Works Director Paula Brown, a
property owner affected by the Glenn St closures.
Oregon law requires an impartial quasi-judicial
decision maker, without personal animosity toward a
party or prejudgment bias. Jackson has animosity.
Jackson is not impartial. She should be recused.
Alleged Bias For David Chapman
Art Bullock, 2007Nov15
This document asks that David Chapman be recused
in the quasi-judicial hearing for the Glenn St closing for
actual bias. Chapman has prejudgment bias. He acted
as 'facilitator' of several Nevada Citizens Panel meetings
where the Glenn St closing was discussed. In those
meetings, Chapman pushed the neighborhood to install
bumpouts because he liked them. When the
neighborhood found out that he was going behind their
backs to meet privately to report on the meetings to
Project Manager Jim Olson, neighbors dis-invited
Chapman from being facilitator, and to the author's
knowledge he never returned.
When he was 'facilitator', Chapman allowed
government employees to verbally attack attendees. In
meeting after meeting, he refused to stop the repeated
verbal attacks on those who opposed City's push for
bumpouts. The verbal attacks were so extreme that
some long-tenure neighbors moved out of Ashland.
Because of Chapman's personal involvement in the
design and process of Nevada St LID, which partially
addressed the Glenn St closing, he is not an impartial
decisionmaker.
In a 2007Sep council meeting, Chapman exploded in
anger and repeatedly cursing and yelling while the
author videotaped his explosion. Chapman's animosity
resulted in a large picture and page 3 expose article in
USA Today on 20070ct3 regarding profanity and sniping
in Ashland City Council. Chapman shows extreme
animosity toward those who oppose his perspective,
including the closing of Glenn S1. He has repeatedly
blown up in anger, in public, at the author when the
author tried to discuss the results of a meeting or an
upcoming meeting.
Under Oregon law, Chapman's actual bias and
extreme animosity requires that he be recused. If he
fails to recuse himself, the other councilors are asked to
recuse him by roll call vote.
Alleged Bias For John Morrison
Art Bullock, 2007Nov20
This document alleges that John Morrison has actual bias
and personal bias against the author, a party in this
quasi-judicial matter. Under Oregon law, Morrison's bias
requires that he be recused. If he fails to recuse himself for
any reason, council is asked to recuse him by roll call vote.
Evidence for Morrison's bias is as follows.
1. Personal attack in quasi-judicial hearing.
On Tue 2007 Apr3, during a quasi-judicial hearing on
Schofield/ Monte Vista LID, Morrison personally and viciously
attacked the author verbally, on camera. It occurred after the
author asserted a bias claim, which Morrison refused to allow,
claiming it had to be in writing. After a councilor asserted the
author had a legal right to speak and assert bias, Morrison
angrily allowed the testimony, then later attacked the author.
2. Arbitrary time limit for bias testimony.
When Morrison allowed the author's bias testimony, he
arbitrarily limited it to 3 minutes, denying the author the time
required to make the assertions, though the author spoke
quickly without repetition. Morrison used this tactic to prevent
the full testimony required for the claim. To the author's
knowledge, no one has ever been limited to 3 minutes to make
a conflict of interest/ex parte/bias claim, and council has no
such rule. The 'rule' was made up to stop the author from
making a full claim.
3. Denial of right to speak.
When time came for the public hearing on the merits of the
LID decision, Morrison denied the author the right to speak,
claiming the author had already spoken. In effect, he claimed
I'd 'used up the author's public hearing time' by using 3 minutes
to assert bias. A councilor said the author had a right to speak
on the merits in the publiC hearing independent of the bias
discussion. Instead of allowing it, Morrison launched into a
vicious, angry, and prolonged personal attack, making false
claims and irrelevant claims having nothing to do with the LID.
The hearing was televised live, with several replay broadcasts.
4. Unannounced new procedure.
Morrison's new process was not described in advance so the
parties could prepare. It was implemented without forewaming
or legal basis or explanation at the time. Morrison never said
during the bias discussion that if the author spoke then, the
author would lose the author's right to speak during the public
hearing on the merits. The author wasn't given a choice to
speak during the disclosure period or during the public hearing,
and if the author had, the author would have asserted such a
forced choice to be illegal, lacking authority. Required
disclosures occur before the public hearing. Morrison used his
unannounced decision to deny the author all rights to speak
during the public hearing. He then used the time that the
author would have spoken to personally attack the author.
5. Justification based on political pressure.
Morrison claimed that he was getting calls 'every day' to stop
the author from speaking. Morrison justified his decision to
disallow a constitutional right to speak in a public hearing
based on pressure from unnamed individuals operating behind
the scenes to tell Morrison to in effect 'shut him up'.
6. Second personal attack in the same hearing.
Public hearing closed without the author's testimony. As
the vote neared, one councilor said he was voting NO on this
LID on procedural grounds because Morrison had denied the
author the right to speak on the merits. Morrison launched into
another personal attack, repeating and magnifying his false
claims and charges.
7. Denied right to rebut.
Though Morrison's testimony introduced new 'facts' after the
hearing opportunity closed, Morrison denied the author the
right to rebut his false 'facts'. Council followed Morrison's
angry outbursts with a 4-2 vote, without the author's ever
having opportunity to address the merits of the LID or the false
claims in Morrison's personal attacks.
8. Another on-the-spot rule to stop testimony.
In 2006, Morrison illegally changed, meeting procedure to
require the public to disclose, in writing, a decision-maker's
bias, conflict of interest, and ex parte communication. Said
rule was specifically targeted at the author, when the author
attempted to do so legally under Oregon law, in Helman
Springs Development planning action.
When the author attempted to assert bias, ex parte contact,
and conflict of interest in that planning action, Morrison
invented a new rule that the public, not the decisionmaker, had
to submit the decision maker's disclosure in writing at the
hearing, though there was no time to hand-write the claim and
evidence, which he refused to allow orally.
Acting without a council rule, Morrison declared that parties
to a quasi-judicial hearing had to submit claims of bias, ex
parte, and conflict of interest in advance of the hearing. This is
an illegal requirement with no demonstrated statutory basis.
Under Oregon law, every quasi-judicial decision maker must
recuse himselflherself as necessary and to pUblicly state the
reasons for recusal. If they fail to property disclose or recuse,
the public has an opportunity to request recusal and/or put
forward facts in support of such recusal.
For these claims, the public's rote is strictly responsive. If
the decisionmaker does as the law requires, the public has
nothing to do, in advance or at the hearing. The public's role
only begins with the lack of proper disclosure and recusal.
Morrison exceeded his authority to create an illegal and
oppressive requirement to shift the burden for disclosure from
the decisionmaker to the author.
Morrison invented his new rule specifically to prevent the
author's bias submission in the Helman Springs Development
planning action, after the author attempted to introduce a
conflict of interest and bias claim in the appropriate time and
way. His arbitrary decision rule showed actual bias.
9. Unilateral disclosure decision.
Morrison implemented this new rule unilaterally, without
council discussion or approval. Council, not mayor, has
decision authority over council rules. Morrison's unilateral
actions prevented the author from having any public hearing
testimony on the merits of Morrison's new, illegal rule.
Morrison continues to deny the opportunity of a hearing on the
merits for his rule.
10. Surprise procedures.
Morrison implemented this new rule without waming, using
a surprise tactic, knowing that the author was going to respond
to the opportunity to address conflict of interest. He knew this
because the author had filed some of the relevant information
with Jackson County Circuit Court in the Nevada Street LID
court case, and had attempted to introduce same for the
Helman Springs Development.
Morrison announced his new rule at the meeting where it
had first applied, claiming he wouldn't accept verbal testimony,
and that charges of ex parte contact, conflict of interest, and
bias had to be written and submitted to the assistant city
attomey rather than the council. It wasn't possible on the spot
to hand-write the allegations in the time remaining before the
legally-required adjournment time. By his surprise tactic,
Morrison prevented the bias claim from being asserted.
11. Refusal to disclose COI at every meeting.
Morrison refused to require councilor Alex Amarotico's
conflict of interest (COI) to be disclosed at every meeting, or at
the start of the session, as required by Oregon law. When the
author attempted to do so, and to rebut the potential conflict of
interest claim, Morrison refused to allow the author to speak,
claiming the author hadn't submitted the charge in writing in
advance.
12. Attempt to shift blame.
In the Park St Apts planning action, Morrison voted to
approve findings that tried to blame the author and another for
City's admitted failure to meet the 120-day deadline.
Morrison, who as mayor is responsible for council's schedule
and Planning Dept working within the law, scheduled the
appeal to council after City claimed the 120 days had expired.
The author, and another appellant, filed the appeal in less time
than the law allowed. Appicello, who is supervised by
Morrison, wrote the findings to blame the appellants, then
attempted to use the ensuing court case to shift the financial
responsibility for paying attorney fees for missing the deadline
to the author and another. The findings were false, not based
on substantial evidence in the record, and written to damage
the author, and the other appellant. It's City's responsibility to
manage the schedule to finish all appeals within 120 days.
Instead, under Morrison's direction, this particular planning
application was delayed until near the end of the period, and
when the expected appeal occurred, Morrison blamed the
author for missing the deadline. In the ensuing writ of
mandamus case, still pending, under Morrison's guidance,
Appicello tried to shift the burden for any attomey fees required
as a result of missing the deadline to be paid by the appellants.
13. Handling of alleged improper roles.
In Jan2004, in the Nevada Citizens Panel, Morrison, then
councilor, attended a meeting where the author presented a
handout alleging inappropriate roles for Planning Department,
Public Works Dept, and misuse of city equipment and
resources for personal use. Morrison interrupted the author,
saying this was a legal matter and that he would take care of it.
He stopped the discussion, then did nothing about it. As a
result, others and the author were targets of repeated verbal
assaults. These verbal assaults during the meeting escalated
to threats of violence outside the meeting. A complaint to city
administrator Gino Grimaldi received no constructive
response. Morrison knew about the verbal assaults, took
responsibility to respond, then failed to act constructively to
stop the improper behavior.
14. A new rule, applied only to the author.
In summer and fall 2006, Morrison invented a new rule that
applied only to the author. In the few minutes before a
summer council meeting, Morrison saw that the author was
going to show a short video clip of the deposition of Nevada
LID project manager Jim Olson. Video showed that Public
Works Director Paula Brown had instructed him to use
cost-sharing percentages that favored her and the Billings
developer who improved her real estate property inside
Nevada LID, and that Olson knew those percentages to be
illegal when she directed him to use them, yet failed to inform
councilor property owners of that key fact. When Morrison
learned the author was going to expose the facts, he invented
a new rule, applying only to the author, that the author would
henceforth not be allowed to use any audiovisuals in the
author's testimony. He claimed the author could speak and
couldn't show any exhibits. He only applied that rule to the
author, allowing others to use audiovisual aids to help their
presentation. He prevented the author from presenting the
video clip at multiple council meetings, including the
court-ordering findings session on Nevada LID.
15. Failure as appointing authority.
As mayor, Morrison is Brown's boss. City admitted in
writing, as held by Jackson County Circuit Court, that Morrison
knew of 8 conflicts of interest for Brown. As her appointing
authority, he's required to dispose of her conflicts of interest,
yet refuses to require disclosure of her 8 conflicts of interest.
His blatant refusal to follow the law shows actual bias here.
16. Allow personal attacks on listserve.
In 2005, the author formed a community organization that
used civil dialogue to reach consensus on 5 proposed
amendments to the Ashland City Charter. When the
community consensus was incompatible with City's Charter
Review Committee's answer, committee members began
personally attacking the author and the civil dialogue group.
The author met with Morrison and asked him as mayor to stop
use of tax money for broadcasting un-civil discourse, filthy
language. and personal attacks on City's web site against the
author and AshlandConstitution.org. The author printed and
gave to him emails from the corporate charter committee,
showing him the filthy language, attribution of motives,
name-calling, and false claims.
The author's requests to Morrison received no constructive
response, and destructive comments continued until charter
committee stopped meeting in June 2005. In spring 2007,
when council put 2 charter measures on the ballot, attacks
retumed and escalated, personally attacking the author again
by name, using tax money to broadcast the attacks on multiple
Iistserves. Morrison failed to stop continued verbal abuse
coming from members of the corporation, and directed to the
author. Instead he poured gas on the fire during the 2007Apr3
hearing. claiming the author received 'special treatment'.
17. Summary.
Evidence above shows Morrison has actual bias, with
personal animosity toward the author. He has used this actual
bias to abuse his power directed to the author, and to commit
procedural injustices directed at the author. Oregon law
requires a quasi-judicial hearirig to have an impartial
decision maker, without personal animosity toward a party or
procedural prejudice. Morrison's outbursts. personal attacks,
invention of unfair procedures, surprise tactics, and violation of
the basic constitutional right to speak during a public hearing
provide adequate evidence that Morrison is personally biased
against the author.
For more than 3 years. Morrison has shown personal bias
against the author. His off-topic, personal attack outbursts in
the 2007 Apr3 council meeting show on video, during a
quasi-judicial hearing, his personal bias and his willingness to
invent rules on the spot to prevent the author's testimony.
Council should recuse Morrison from this matter as having
personal bias.
. .
.0
The People
An Independent Voters' Guide To Ballot Measures Changing Ashland's Constitution
this one ~' a keepCl:..
l!ardcopy No.2
Tuesday, May 15,2007
~~\':~
"'::::... .. ~
- --
,y~
~/h\'''
Power Shift From Mayor,
Council To City Manager
Measure 15-76
Charter Amendment
Should Ashland Shift Power
From Elected Mayor And
Council To Unelected
City Manager?
What's the major effect of council's
city manager amendment? Amend-
ment would give an unelected city
manager the authority to hire and
fire 8 department heads who run key
departments doing City's actual
work: Police Chief, Fire Chief, and
Directors of Planning, Public Works,
AFN, Electric tJtility, Finance, and
Human Resources. Their expertise
ranges widely--Hosler Dam, street
paving, fire fighting, sewage treatment,
making arrests, AFN, electric substa-
tions, emergency medical service,etc..
Who hires and fires department
heads now? Mayor and 6 coun-
cilors, all elected. Current charter
requires mayor to make and announce
preliminary decision. After public com-
ment, council approves or vetoes by
majority vote, for accountability and
transparency. Process allows Citizen
oversight of key personnel decisions.
Why is the power to hire and fire
these 8 people so important?
Amendment would give an unelect-
ed manager power to control what
work actually gets done.
Does recent history show city
administrator is a more stable posi-
tion than mayor? No. In the last 10
years, Ashland's had 3 mayors and 5
administrators. The last 4 administra-
tors averaged 2 1/2 years in the job.
WQuld amendment put department
heads in the position of having 2
bosses? Yes. Department heads
would continue to ask for and receive .
policy direction from council, yet the
only person with power to fire them
would be a manager coordinating their
schedules and budgets
In practice, how does hiring a
department head actually work?
City just hired a new police chief.
The selection process had possibly
the highest Citizen oversight in
Ashland history. Citizens recom-
mended selection criteria, then wrote
25 interview questions on taxpayers'
issues--panhandling downtown,
TASERs, substance abuse, community
policing, etc. Police Chief candidates
were interviewed in council chambers,
televised live, public invited, without
prior candidate knowledge of Citizens'
written questions. Without cost, you
can watch this video online.
After this 2-hour public job interview, a .
. Citizen straw poll of attendees, which
included Ashland police officers, pre-
ferred Terry Holderness 2-1.
Then, 2 panels of councilors and
Citizens conducted formal job inter-
views. They presented their evalua-
tions to the mayor, who recommended-
-and council approved--Terry
Holderness as our new police chief.
Would amendment require city
manager to use this or a similar
process? No. City manager could fire
or hire police chief--or other depart-
ment heads--without any involvement
or oversight from Citizens, council, or
mayor.
What's Broken?
Is this a solution in search of a
problem? Do we have a problem hir-
ing and firing. department heads
solved by this constitutional
change? No. Despite requests, the
public record shows no current prob-
lems in how Ashland currently hires or
fires department heads that would be
solved by this amendment.
If it's not broken, why fix it? Propo-
nents'
support
is based
on theo-
ry and
business
practice,
not a
solution
to a cur-
rent
problem.
They say
a future
mayor Gf
council
may not
be pro-
fession-
ai, and
a city
manager
would
be.
Are Taxpayers Protected?
Today's charter requires mayor and
council to live inside Ashland. Does
this amendment require city manag-
er to live here and pay taxes like the
rest of us? No. Amendment's lack of
residency requirement means city man-
ager could live in California and com-
mute, or live elsewhere in Oregon,
without paying Ashland property taxes.
Would there be any charter limits
on the city manager's authority to
hire and fire? No.
What's an example of the real-
world risks of a city manager with
this power? In Oct 2005, Ashland
administrator Gino Grimaldi resigned,
working 6 more months in transition.
Amendment would have empowered
Grimaldi, after resigning, to fire depart-
ment heads. Amendment lacks any
oversight or veto power to stop a man-
ager who's resigned from firing any or
all department heads, including those
with 20+ years of public service.
It's Time To Vote
What are the major effects of vot-
ing YES vs. NO on this amendment?
(1) Voting YES would amend the char-
ter to transfer power to hire and fire 8
department heads from mayor and
council to a city manager. Voting NO
would keep that power vested in mayor
and council. (2) Voting YES would
remove the mayor's role as City's Chief
Executive Officer, without assigning
that role to anyone else. Voting NO
would keep the mayor as City's Chief
Executive Officer.
This measure is numbered M15-76.
Ballots will be mailed about April 28.
Ballot must be received by 8pm,
Tuesday, May 15.
The Power To Sell Lithia
Park Is On The Ballot
Measure 15-77
Charter Replacement
Lithia Park is "hereby reserved and
forever dedicated to the people of
the city..."
These elegant, moving words in the
Ashland Charter, our city's constitution,
were crossed out by vote of 3 coun-
cilors and the mayor in the March6
council meeting that put council's char-
ter on
the
lot.
Th
charte
J- pro-
posed
by 4
people
gives
the
same
four-
some
the
power to
sell
Lithia
Park to
develop-
ers.
For
dec-
ades,
Ash-
land's
charter has prohibited the sale or
lease of Lithia Park. City can't sell or
lease any part of Lithia Park without a
majority vote of the. people.
Council's charter would shift the
power to decide Lithia Park's future
from the majority will of the people
to 3 councilors and mayor.
Slipping Power Changes
Below The Radar
The power to sell Lithia Park was
being slipped below the radar until
Feb20, when i told council they were
allegedly violating Oregon's fair ballot
laws by not telling voters a major effect
of council's charter was to give council
the power to sell Lithia Park.
When i disclosed this hidden power to
council, some councilors gave me
that "deer-in-the-headlights" look.
Others didn't seem surprised.
One councilor asked city attorney
Mike Franell, on camera, if the pro-
posed charter gave City the right to sell
Lithia Park. He responded affirmatively,
confirming my testimony without check~
ing. Franell already knew, yet neither
he nor the other 2 attorneys paid thou-
sands of tax dollars for charter work
had ever informed charter committee or
city council of this key power shift.
For council's next meeting, March 6,
Franell wrote that charter committee
and council had never discussed
this power shift. Franell recommend-
ed council put back the Lithia Park pro-
tection, writing that state law doesn't
prohibit the sale of Lithia Park, like
our current charter.
Three councilors strenuously objected
to putting the proposed charter on the
May 15 ballot in this situation, saying
council's charter still lacked basic pro-
tections for parks, water, and electric
utility, that voters would reject it, too
many last minute changes, etc..
Mayor and 3 councilors
deleted these words as
"outdated" and "Qbsolete":
Lithia Park is "hornby
roso,".fOd :Jnd {g..-over
dodjc:Jtod to the poople of
the city... "
After 3 councilors strongly opposed
'", ....~.;".;:.l,,~~
i In 1907, Lithia Park was just an idea, Men wanted a
"development' at the old mill site. Women wanted a park,
so they organized Ashland's Women Civic Improvement
League, shown here building the Plaza. .
In 1908, it came to a vote of the people. The men, that IS.
Women had no right to vote. Yet, somehow these women
determined the outcome of the election, using influence
mechanisms still a mystery to modern political science.
100 years later, the issue is back.
And this time, women can vote.
ark, Kate Jackson, elected last fall
with major money contributions
from developers, moved to put
council's charter on the ballot-~
WITHOUT the attorney-recommend-
ed Lithia Park protection. She .
cil had talked ab
charter on avid
Chapman seconded. Instead of using
the motion discussion to explain the
power to sell Lithia Park, Russ Silbiger
attacked those petitioning Circuit Court
for a fair summary in the Voters'
Pamphlet of council's new powers. He
voted with Jackson and Chapman, a
common 3-vote bloc.
Mayor Morrison broke council's 3-3
tie to force the "council can sell
Lithia Park" charter onto the ballot.
Ashland's Crown Jewel
Lithia Parr< is sacred ground to many
Ashlanders. Many who treasure
Lithia Park as Ashland's crown jewel
find nothing 'obsolete' or 'outdated'
about keeping Lithia Park "forever
dedicated to the people of the city".
It's Time To Vote
The ball is now in the voters' court.
.
If you support removing charter
protection for Lithia Park, thus
empowering mayor and 3 councilors
to sell Lithia Park to developers,
you'd vote YES on M15-77.
If you support keeping the current
prohibition on selling or leasing
Lithia Park, requiring a majority vote
of the people to decide Lithia Park's
future, you'd vote NO on M15-77.
There's More...
Council's charter has many other con-
troversial provisions. Some are cov-
ered in this paper. Others are included
in Voter Education Sessions (see page
3), and in the online version of this
newspaper, at http://
groups. yahoo.com/grou p/OfThePeople
In A NutsheU...
On May 15,2007, Ashlanq votes on
.~.. ballofmeasures initiated from half of
city'coum::il.and mayor, not by voters.
MeaSUre 15'..76 would amend
Ashland~s City Charter to transfer the
pOWer tq choo$e department headS
from the elected mayor and counCil to
an l,melected,city manager.
MeaSure 15~77 wQuld replace our
entire charter with council's charter,
whi.ch includes many power shifts from
voters to council.
For a quick read of ballot issues,
read balded sections in this paper.
You can read and email the expanded
online articles at http;/I
groups. yahoQ.corrllgroup/OfThePeople
YOll can read articles in correct format
(fonts, bolds, italics, etc.) by joining
the group. Your public letters to the
editor Can emaiIedto
OfThtPeo booQtoup~,com
Measure 15-77
The Power To Sell
Ashland's Water To
Corporations
Council's proposed charter grants
council the power to sell Ashland's
water to corporations without any char-
. ter restrictions on Q!,lantity or purpose.
City attorney Mike Franell repeatedly
wrote and told council (e.g., see
2006Dec19 video} that the current
charter restricts City's power to sell
water to corporations. Ashland's char-
ter uses the word "inhabitants", which
Franell wanted to change to "resi-
dents". He explained mat, under the
law, only human beings can "inhabit".
Corporations "reside" (they have an
address). By changing the word
"inhabitants" to "residents", the 3 coun-
cilors and mayor who voted to put this
power on the ballot would be empow-
ered to sell Ashland's water to any cor-
poration without charter restrictions on
quantity or purpose.
"Inhabitants" Or "Residents"
Changing from "inhabitants" to "resi-
dents" aoesn't sound like a big deal.
The words sound like synonyms.
Yet the legal effect from this one-word
change is profound, a classic example
why charters are changed with the
utmost care. Small, seemingly insignif-
icant, wording changes can read to
major interpretation differences.
Corporate ownership of water recent-
ly hit close to home, when McCloud,
CA, who didn't have our protections,
contracted to allow Nestle's to draw a
half-billion gallons of water per year for
99 years, for bottled water. Inhabitants
are spending thousands of dollars in a
big court case to get their water back
from a resident.
Measure 15-76
Is water a human right, or a com-
modity to be bought and sold in the
global marketplace? City attorney
maintained that water is a com modi-
!y. Charter committee chair John
Enders argued that City should be
empowered to sell Ashland's water
outside city limits for revenue.
Do My Values Fit Your Law?
How Do My Beliefs Fit
Council's Amendment?
I believe in open, transparent
government--decisions should
be made publicly. Does this
amendment ensure open gov-
ernment? No. It allows a city
manager to make decisions pri-
vately and unilaterally.
Amendment doesn't require man-
ager to consult with or inform any
elected representative. Under this
amendment, public and elected
representatives could learn after
the fact that a career public ser-
vant had been fired. Amend-ment
doesn't require city manager to
publicly explain the reasons for fir-
ing or hiring, even after the fact.
I believe in partnership gov-
ernment--e/ected and appointed
public servants should work togeth-
er cooperatively to get the job done.
Does the city manager amendment
require partnership? 'No. Today's
charter requires partnership.
Amendment removes partnership
requirement and allows manager to
make hire/fire decisions unilaterally.
I believe in the basic business
principle that 'leaders pick imple-
menters'-those who set policy
should choose the implementers, to
make sure the job gets done. What
vote would be consistent with this
belief? A NO vote. Under this
amendment, council and mayor would
still set policy, while removing their
authority to hire and fire 8 department
heads who implement those policies.
I believe in accountability -- those
making government decisions
should be directly accountable to
the people. What vote would be
consistent with this belief? A NO
vote. Current elected representatives
hire and fire department heads, and if
the electorate dislikes the decision,
they can recall those who made the
decision. Proposed amendment gives
authority to an appointed public ser-
vant who is not elected, and thus not
directly accountable to the taxpayers.
Another Hidden Power
In March, 2005, i discovered in the
committee's draft charter the hidden
power to sell Ashland's water to corpo-
rations. The entire water protection
language had been removed. Instead
of focusing on the major issue of who
owns the water--and the broader pic-
ture of 'selling the commons'--charter
committee was preoccupied with fine-
tuning the City Band. After i disclosed
the hidden power to sell the water,and
AshlandConstitution.org began drafting
its own amendment, charter commit-
tee, and later council, put part of the
water protections back, with revisions.
Franell proposed 7 versions of water
protection langua~e, all allowing coun-
cil to sell Ashland s water to a corpora-
tions for bottled water. Council's ballot
version granted the power by changing
"inhabitants" to "residents".
If you want to ALTER the charter to
allow a council foursome to sell
Ashland's water to corporations for bot-
tled water, you'd vote YES on M15-77.
If you want to KEEP the current water
protection language, which stops coun-
cil from selling Ashland's water for bot-
tled water, you'd vote NO on M15-77.
Losing The Right For A
Majority Vote On Utilities
After my FAQ (Frequently Asked
Questions) flyers describing council's
new powers were copied and emailed
all over town, City used tax money to
hire former city attorney Paul Nolte to
respond to my FAQ. Nolte's promotion
r.iece on city's web site was called an
FAQ', though it had no questions. It
did, however, have many false state-
ments and personal opinions that City
called facts. For example, Nolte falsely
claimed water protection lan~uage was
"repeated verbatim". It wasn t, as
described above and below. See http://
groups. yahoo.com/group/OfThePeople
for more examples.
In addition to changing "inhabitants",
the first part of the water protection
sentence has been removed. This part
specified who the water was for, and
required a majority vote of the people
for other utility services. Think AFN.
The right of Ashland voters to decide
utility services was removed in coun-
cil's charter, then covered up in a factu-
ally incorrect, false reassurance 'FAQ'
paid by tax dollars.
If you want to GIVE UP the right for a
majority vote on utility services, you'd
vote YES on M 15-7T.
If you want to KEEP the right for a
majority vote on utility services, you'd
vote NO on M15-77.
. ~
.,0'
. .
;u.er'~'
I believe city employees should be
protected from city politics. I don't
trust 'politicians' to hire and fire
department heads. What vote would
be consistent with this belief? A
YES vote, if you believe the manag-
er would be above city politics. If
you believe a city manager (hired and
fired by council and mayor) would be
less political and more protective of
department heads, you'd vote YES. If
you believe council and mayor ('politi-
cians') would be more protective of the
people implementing their policy, you'd
vote NO.
I believe government should be
run in a professional manner.
Would this amendment ensure pro-
fessionalism? No. Amendment
changes the title from city administrator
to city manager, without changing the
people involved or specifying profes-
sional procedures. Some say a city
manager, who may be trained in public
administration, would be more profes-
sional than elected representatives.
However, amendment has no proce-
dural or performance requirements to
ensure professionalism.
Have You Seen Thirst?
A few multinational corporations are
buying water systems worldwide as a
strategic business move to control and
manage water.' To see firsthand the
impact of 'water as a commodity' on
cities and Citizens, attend Ashland
Constitution.org's screening of
Thirst, on Sat., May 5, 6-8pm at
RVML, 258 A St. Thirst is a widely
acclaimed documentary of water priva-
tization in Cochabamba, Bolivia and
Stockton, CA. The core global issue:
voters have a chance to Voters' Pamphlets was
read-think-discuss. And brought home this month,
since you keep the Voters' when Jackson County
Pamphlet antj mail the bal- Circuit Court Judge Philip
lot, you have a hardcopy of Arnold ruled that Measure
anything that's passed. 37 claims were not transfer-
That's why it's a major able because words like
problem that's council's pro- "transferable" weren't in the
posed charter changes law. If you find that hard to
aren't in the Voters' believe, check it yourself--
Pamphlet. No official final Measure 37's full text was in
copy exists anywhere. the Nov 2, 2004, Voters'
Measure 37 example. Pamphlet (Vol 1 ,Pg103-104).
The long-term value of You kept your copy, right?
Length doesn't matter. In
2004, Oregon Constitution
was changed by Measure
36, 1 sentence long--in the
Voters' Pamphlet.
. The same pamphlet had
the full text of Measure 33,
which took 7 pages and 13
columns of fine print.
Full text in the Voters'
Pamphlet is critical for
voter preparation and fol-
lowup. Voters' Pamphlets
are ma~d in advance, so
Pamphlet
Power
The Voters' Pamphlet puts
the law in your hands.
Literally.
Except this time.
Last fall, Ashland voters
approved a charter amend-
ment requiring a future
real estate transfer tax to
be approved by voters.
Amendment's full text was
in the Voters' Pamphlet.
Measure 15-76
City Manager--What Does Research Say?
politicians', '1 moved here from a city
with a city manager, and it worked
there'. Citizen comments AGAINST
the proposal included: 'don't believe
in one-person rule', 'no accountability
in manager's job', 'it's working now,
leave it a/~ne: 'council and mayor run
the city, they're the ones who should
pick department heads', 'letting one
person fire
department heads
is undemocratic',
'where's the
checks and bal-
ances?', 'who's
behind this?
some small group
trying to control
the govern-
ment?', 'we voted
on this a/ready and
said NO, why are
we voting on it
again?', 'city
administrator is a
revolving-door job
with people here
today and gone
tomorrow', 'these
city managers
want to build an
empire of staff, so
don't be surprised
if taxes skyrocket',
'this is just like
the federal government, taking
power from the people and giving it
to bureaucrats'.
City manager approach isn't new.
Ashland considered it in 1970 and said
NO. Cities like Rome, New York tried it
and returned to a city administrator
approach. What does the research
say about city manager 'model'?
Does national research show city
manager cities have lower taxes? No.
Does national research show city
manager cities have
better service? No.
What does nation-
al research show
about the effect of
city manager on
council? That
>30% of the time,
council becomes a
'token symbol'.
What does the
local research show?
Ashland Constitu-
tion.org survey of
over 400 Ashland-
ers found 82%
opposed a city
manager choosing
department heads.
What reasons did
Ashlanders give for
their opinion about
city manager power?
Citizen comments
FOR the proposal
included: 'council's
a mess, a manager couldn't do any
worse', 'we need professionals run-
ning the government, not
Ashland's specialness didn't happen
by accident. It happened because
wise generations before us knew how
to build a city. From the ground up.
With a firm foundation. Based on the
majority will. Protected in a'charter.
That only We The People can change.
These ballot measures, from mayor
and 3 councilors, remove Citizen
rights, decrease City's responsibili-
ties, and expand City's p.ower.
i found no examples in council's char-
ter where voters, or taxpayers, or prop-
erty owners gained rights. i found
many examples where they lost rights.
i found no examples where City lost
power. i found many examples where
City gained power. With ,less account-
ability. And less transparency.
For example, Ashland Charter
. removes any counCilor convicted of a
felony. Council's charter allows a
convicted felon to remain councilor.
Plus, unlike the Ashland Charter,
council's charter allows a councilor
to remain after destroying public
records.
If you believe Ashland City Charter is
'outdated' and 'obsolete', and council's
proposals are improvements, you'd
. vote YES on M15-76 and M15-77.
If you believe the foundation and
heritage codified in the Ashland City
Charter is still sound, you'd vote NO on
M15-76 and M15-77.
What's A Charter?
The Ashland City Charter is the most
important document in city government.
Ashland Charter is our constitution.
It creates our rights.
It defines City responsibilities.
It limits government power.
Ashland Charter created a municipal
corporation callecl "City of Ashland".
It defined limited powers for that cor-
poration to serve Ashland inhabitants.
It defined voter rights. And taxpayer
rights. And property rights--even for
property owners living in other states
and countries.
We're not talking boring bylaws.
We're talking the foundation for
Ashland self-government.
We're talking about a unique constitu-
tion that codified Ashland's special
heritage. Most cities have 3 branches
of government. Ashland has 4. City
recorder's office is a Citizen oversight
branch,not beholden to other branches,
elected by the people, and accountable
to voters. The 'Show Us The Law' arti-
cle explains why that's important.
Our current charter has many unique-
nesses and rarities. Lithia Park protec-
tion. An independent parks commis-
sion. Electing a city judge. Permanent
protection for our beloved City Band.
Ash/andConstitution.org's sur-
vey of over 400 Ash/anaers
found 82% opposed to a city
manager hiring and firing
department heads.
... Of The People
Page 2
http://groups.yahoo.com/ group/ OfThePeople
IVH;;;a.;:.UI t:::' I v-I U
Buckley, Bates, Gilmour, Au Coin, Golden:
Resounding NO On City Manager Proposal
The Voters' Pamphlet has a don't- candidates. "The Mayor/ Administrator
miss 'Argument' from the above 5 indi- form...attract[s] candidates who value
viduals AGAINST City's proposed man- community involvement and collabora-
ager amendment. It's online at http:// tive government which includes the
groups.yahoo.com/group/OfThePeople mayor, council, city commissions, and
State Representative Peter Buckley, the community in equal measure."
State Senator Dr. Alan s.es" , . Ie'" moue. . r .
Bates, Jackson Ii . i. U y,' ,f Don't Shift
County COl'!lmissioner Au Coin, GoIdet1: Power From
Dr. Dave Gilmour, for- "1t....~1, d " ....... . .1"" ,.
mer US Congress "'-OIHSn. VOf.srs~JOWY' ;. Voters
Repr~sentative Les r8SOtirict,'. . . ~"J"rAiect':' . Buckley, Bates,
AuCOin, and former ,,', . 'T .""'1_ ^ Gilmour Au COin
Jackson County Measure 5-76. '!' . ' a~d Golden ha~e' all
Commissioner Jeff '" been elected by thou-
Golden urged Ashland to vote NO on sands of votes. They know firsthand
the city manager amendment. Why? about government responsive to the
Don't Un-Balance The Power people. "Changing Ashland from
Buckley-Bates-Gilmour-AuCoin- mayor/ administrator to council/ manag-
Golden disagreed with giving unilateral er form of government is a significant
decision power to a 'city manager' by shift of power away from the electorate
pointing out the importance of main- and over to an appointed official. "
taining a balance of power. "The inher- Looking For Love In All The
ent friction between council, mayor and W PI
administrator brings about better deci- rong aces
sions and creates a city government Proponents sayan unelected city
more readily responsive 10 the leader- manager is a source of leadership.
ship of the electorate. " Buckley et al. argued that the source is
Proponents have argued this tension "the leadership of the electorate. ".
is 'inefficient' and that a city manager
acting unilaterally could get things done FrYing Pan To The Fire
faster. Buckley et al. argued that Some see city manager as filling a
requiring multiple parties to work leadership void in Ashfand's current
together produces better decisions. ~overnment. Buckley et al. had a
Jumping from the f'1mg pan to the ~re"
A Collaborative Administrator, response: "A mayors pefformance IS
Not A Powerful City Manager up for voter review eve'Y four years or
sooner by recall. Of greater concern
Buckley et al. disagreed with propo- should be an appointed Manager, insu-
nents' claim that givmg a city admmis- lated from the voters, with polmcal
trator more power would attract better leanings divergent from Ashland's. "
Measures 1J>--76. 15-77 ". .' .
. Citizens' Win '"Fairtlallot"..Case
State law fIKlUlrSS an unbiased'measure description in the Voters' Pamphlet.
Without filing ballot measure text. City filed an allegedly illegal ballot measure .
description. Voters can thank Pam Vavra, Venita Va~f Kindler Stout. PhiQp
lang, and Ruth MiNer for iglpl'Oving .ballot measure descriptions by contesting the
impr~r.language and winning a big part of their "Fair Ballot" case. They won
major though not complete im~ts inCfty's descriptions: PetitiOnEir$' v~r~
sian reptacedcity attorney's charter question. '.Distractions were removed, sen~
tences rewritten. More info at . http://groups~yahoo.comIgrouplOfThePeopte
Measure 15-77 .
Council's Charter Alters Property Rights
Council uses an "Local Improvement
District" (L.I.D.) to put liens on homes
to pay for 'street improvements', even if
the neighborhood doesn't want them.
The last 3 LIDs have all been
opposed by the neighborhood majority.
Last year, Plaza St neighbors sus-
pended their 'improvement' by collect-
ing signatures of 2/3 of property own-
ers scheduled for liens on their homes.
Council's charter empowers council
to change that threshold to 100%.
On Apr2, Council directed staff to use
LIDs to pave all remaining 10.42 miles
of unpaved alleys and streets. All are
Measure 15-76
A Short Course In Public
Administration
in neighborhoods opposed to the
paving. If you live on, or near enough
to, an unpaved alley or street, there'll
be a lien on your home to pay for this
paving. Paving is costly. The last LID
had a lien over $20,000.
AshlandConstitution.org's survey
reported 94% of those surveyed want-
ed to require majority support before
putting liens on people's homes.
City manager amendment goes to the heart of
American government, the principle of 'balance of
power'. American governments at all levels have
been designed with multiple branches acting as a
check and balance against each other. Ashland has
successfully used its current design for 70+ years
City Manager proponents rely heavily on their theo-
ry of how public administration should work. Here's
some background about the so-called "strong mayor"
vs. "weak mayor" approach to city government.
A Rose By Any Other Name--
What DO Those Titles Mean?
What's the 'strong mayor' model? Mayor is
head of the executive branch and has Chief
Executive Officer (CEO) authority, including the
power to hire and fire department heads with
council approval. Department heads report to a city
administrator, who coordinates their schedules and
budgets. Ashland uses the strong mayor model.
What's the 'weak mayor' model? Mayor is head
of the executive branch, yet has no executive officer
authority. Department heads are hired and fired by a
city manager appointed by mayor and council.
Does changing from 'strong mayor' to 'weak
mayor' affect checks and balances? 'Yes. It shifts
power from legislative to executive branch. Council
(legislative) would lose veto power for appointments.
What's the difference between an executive and
an administrator? An executive makes direction-
Ballot Measure Summary Checklist
All Of Government In 2 Words:Who Decides?
Council's ballot measures change decision authority. The key question: WHO
DECIDES? Here a checklist of major changes in these power-shift packages.
To shift decision power to the proposed authority, vote YES on the measure.
To keep decision power where it is today, vote NO on both measures.
Measure 15-76 City Manager Amendment
ToAdoptThis, ToKeepThis,
Vote Yes Vote No
City Manager Mayor,Council
Nobody Mayor
City Manager Mayor
5 Councilors Not Applicable
Who Should Decide To...
Hire and fire 8 key department heads
Make CEO (Chief Executive Officer) decisions
Provide oversight supervision of city employees
Remove a councilor for 'indirect coercion'"
Measure 15~77 Council's Replacement Charter
ToAdoptThis, ToKeepThis, .
Vote Yes Vote No Who Should Decide To...
Council Voters Sell or lease Lithia Park
Council Voters Sell City water to corporations without charter
restrictions on quantity or purpose (bottled water)
Set the threshold % required for property owners
to suspend liens on neighborhood homes
Define the role of the Police Chief -
Determine new utility services
If a convicted felon can remain a councilor
Set council's salaries and fringe benefits ("perks")
Set salaries for judge, recorder (alters balance of
power for Ashland's 4 branches of government)
Council Voters
Council Voters
Council Voters
Council Voters
Council Voters
Council Voters
Voter Education Sessions
Wed Apr 25, 7-9pm Council Chambers, 1175 E MainSt
Televised Live On RVT\I, Channel 9
Replays On Channels 9, 14
Sponsored by AshlandConstitution.org
Presentation And Dialogue On 2 Ballot Measures
Granting City of Ashland...
The Power To Sell Lithia Park To Developers
The Power To Sell Ashland Water For Bottled Water
The Power To Alter Property Rights In An LID
The Power For Council To Set Its Own Salary, Benefits
The Power For An Unelected Mgr To Appoint Dept Heads
More Voter Education Sessions, with handouts and Q&A:
SOU Stevenson Union, Room 330 Hardwired Bldg, 340 A St
Info: Med ia Collective@sou.edu AshlandConstitution@yahoo.com
Mon Apr 30 6:30-8pm Sun Apr 29 1 :30-3pm
Mon May 7 6:30-8pm Sun May 6 1 :30-3pm
Mon May14 6:30-8pm
At the Unitarian Center, 87 4th Street
Sponsor: WILPF, Women's Inti League For Peace & Freedom
Info: 488-3642, 488-9286.
Fri May 3 1-3pm Charter Water: Losing Charter Protections.
Sun May13 2-4pm The Real Meaning Of Mother's Day. Plus:
The Women Who Saved Lithia Park From Developers in 1908
Sat, May 5, 6-8pm At Risk: Ashland's Water. RVML, 258 A St
Screening of Thirst, documentary on water privatization
For updates, join: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/OfThePeople
Amendment's Impact
Would this amendment make a city manager
City's chief executive? No. City would have no
CEO. Amendment removes mayor as CEO without
replacement. City manager would be "Chief
Administrative Officer", and would continue to imple-
ment policy decisions of council and mayor.
Does amendment authorize city manager to set
Ashland's direction? No. Ashland Charter vests
policy authority in council and mayor, with or without
this amendment. Oregon law prevents council from
delegating legislative authority to any other party.
Does the city manager approach follow federal
and state practices? No. U.S. President, for exam-
ple, chooses the cabinet ('leaders pick implementers'
principle). Ashland Charter uses this standard
approach, requiring mayor, head of the executive
branch (like the President) to select department
heads (like the cabinet), with council's approval.
If council and mayor set City's policy direction,
shouldn't they be the ones to hire and fire depart-
ment heads to carry out that policy? Yes, if you
follow the basic principle that "leaders pick
implementers". That's the reason Ashland's mayor
and council have had authority to hire and fire depart-
ment heads for> 70 years.
Would amendment increase costs? Yes. 'City
manager' title pays about $15,000 more (plus over
40% fringe benefits) than 'city administrator' title, so
budget costs would increase.
Who's In Charge Here?
Would there be any charter limits, or checks and
balances, on the city manager's authority to hire
and fire? No. City manager's authority would be
unilateral. Neither mayor nor council nor community
would have oversight or veto power.
To me, council ii!nd mayor are making a lot of
bad decisions, so why not let a city manager
make the executive decisions? Amendment
doesn't authorize city manager to set city policy
or make executive decisions except for the decision
to hire/fire department heads. By charter and state
law, council and mayor still have ultimate policy
responsibility, council as the legislative branch, mayor
as head of the executive branch. With or without the
amendment, the buck stops with council and mayor.
If you want to empower council to set
the voting threshold, you'd vote YES.
If you want to keep current property
rights to suspend LIDs, you'd vote NO.
setting decisions. An administrator implements deci-
sions of others. In Ashland, mayor and council set
direction. Administrator carries out that direction.
What does a city administrator actually do?
S/he coordinates budgets and schedules. City of
Ashland is a $100 million corporation, with complex,
multimillion dollar projects like AFN and wastewater
treatment plant. City administrator ensures each
department gets the job done within council's budget.
A city manager would do the same basic job.
If an administrator and manager both coordinate
schedules and budgets, what's the difference?
(1) Manager would unilaterally hire and fire 8
department heads; current administrator only rec-
ommends hiring/firing to mayor and council. (2)
Manager would function without executive officer
oversight from mayor; current administrator is
subordinate to mayor as CEO. (3) Manager would
be insulated from pressure from council and
mayor on personnel decisions; current adminis-
trator is not.
http://groups.yahoo.com/ group/OjThePeople
Page 3
... Of The People
. . ~ Message To The Spiritual Community
This artl~le IS f~r th~ values voter. Many passionate about Lithia Park It' T T V t
If you strive to live lI.fe ba~ed on core our water, etc., say the would neve~ S . .Ime O. 0 e , .
values and personal integrity, this arti- (again) speak tocounc~ beca P~lItlcal pundits say 'Americans vote
cle is for you. cil doesn't listen or ho th' uselcoun- their wallet.' This hasn't been my
A hi d h " nor elr va ues experience 'th A hi d' . .
s. an . as. an active spiritual com- The contrast between ne ative ~I_ . WI s. ,an. s spIritual
mun!ty, With diverse beliefs, cere- itics and positive values hi I d r community. When It s time to decide,
m~nles, and practices. This communi- deep disconnect between A~h~ :' a values ~ot.ers ?on't ask "How much
ty IS a vibrant, vital key to Ashland's spiritual integrity and the pOliti~~1 s m?ne~ IS In th~s for me?" They ask "Is
culture, economy, and specialness. process used by those in p thIs .allgned ~/th my core values?"
Yet it has not been integral to This disconnect has in lar e o~~'led Th!s ballot !S about more than money.
Ashland's self-government. to these 2 ballot meas g p This ballot IS about Ashland's future.
Ashland's diverse spiritual community ures. .It'~ a sad .day to see the power to sell
shares one commonality: 'We don't Th S I . L.lthla Par,k on an Ashland ballot.
get involved in city politics.' e 0 utlon Is Integrity From Along With the power to sell Ashland's
While presenting council's 2 ballot The Spiritual Community water to corporations for bottled water.
measures to over 100 values voters Who's responsible for this situation? It's embarrassing to be in a county
i've seen and felt this community's ' Ultimately, we are. We The People th~t clo~ed all its public libraries.
shock and dismay at this ballot. are the ultimate check and balance. It s painful to watch the flag lowered
L?w-integrity government only per- on the now-closed Ashland Public
The power to sell Uthia Park to devel- SIStS when the high-integrity com- Library, with a police officer escorting
?pers-- that's unthinkable. Uthia Park munitydoesn't set the standards. out reluctant children trying to save
IS sacred ground. Governments don't fix themselves. their books.
T~e power to sell our water to cor po- And corporate media no longer pro- Yet that's where we are.
ratIons for bottled water, like McCloud? teet democracy. Instead, they feed the
I never thought that'd happen here. flames of disrespect by adding vicious
What do you mean there's no official attacks and anonymous name-calling.
copy of the measures in the Voters' The integrity to change government
Pamphlet or filed with City Recorder? won't come from government or media.
How could we have come to this? It will come from a high integrity
This isn't Ashland. This is surreal. community setting standards and a
What's happening? respectful tone of self-governance.
Recent history shows that when the
The Problem Is The Process. community brings values-based integri-
The corporation known as City of . ty to government, things change.
Ashland has about 200 paid employees Grandmothers & Friends In Green.
and about 200 unpaid volunteers serv- This spiritual group was founded on a
ing on commissions and boards. deep gratitude for Ashland's water.
These individuals contribute their life Their gatherings are blessings in Lithia
energy as public servants, and as Park. When they arrived in council
members of the corporation created by chambers last summer with 1100 sig-
the Ashland Charter. natures collected in 1 month to protect
Unfortunately, their energies are Ashland's water, we saw a noticepble
expended in a wasteful process that'd shift in council's tone and orientation
be unacceptable if the spiritual commu- toward the watershed.
nity set the standards for conduct. First Nations Day. Another example
The tone has been set at the top, occurred last fall, when Native
by mayor and council, who use ad Americans asked council to approve
hominem attacks, literally cursing and their permit--already rejected by City
scre~f!1ing in council chambers, using staff--for a 3-block parade to dedicate
u~-clvlllanguage, personally attacking the extraordinary totem pole statue
dissenters, and attributing negative welcoming all to Ashland's downtown.
In fact, there's no guarantee the text motives to those who disagree. Many individuals, some of whom had
won't change after the election. City is using tax money and its never been in council chambers, spoke
If you've downloaded the ballot web site to promote council's char- from the heart about their values the
measure text, your version may no ter by using false information and painful history of Native America~s
longer be on the ballot. And there's personal opinions claimed to be and their beloved hometown. '
no easy way to reconcile the versions. facts. This allegedly violates state When they spoke their truth to gov-
Council didn't discuss my request to laws that prohibit spending tax money ernment, the energy in council cham-
p!"ovide an audit trail of all changes to support or oppose a ballot measure. bers changed dramatically. Normal
since the March15 filing deadline. City is using tax dollars to make per- win-lose dynamics were replaced by a
We, don't know who's changing it, sonal attacks and call people names genuine searching for positive solutions
what s being changed, when, or why. on City's emaillistserves. grounded in values. It was not possi-
How ironic that the text of both ballot City's attacks have successfully driv- ble for 'politics as usual' to exist in
measures is not transparent, when the en away many in Ashland's spiritual the ~~ace created and sustained by
measures themselves reduce community, who strive to live in person- a cntlcal mass of spiritually ground-
accountability and transparency. al truth and peace, avoiding conflicts. ed individuals speaking from the
'."'------0.71''1''------7. .... ............ .. heart.
; . . th-c)se)Nbj:9jij~t:lCrl.wjti(SI--------7-pealir----1"1"---------
!....1,.,1~"Q;~ihl~nclf/ty .(;OUnfJllq1JJmsed1h~PdtlQt.~~~rw~iWhiOh.llm{(~d...OOU~~itis
:pO~~"i.CoUn(;ll saId ounet!J((Pulcl:cleclllr~thee/eCtl(>n. nullat14
:~:. . ~r:~oted .. .. evote~~. . '. held~. Thlsestabli~lJed
: . ..I .1.!.."nJlteQ g. (;aunoll, ~fll orklngto increase their power.
:pu~~':\1am~ndmen a ot ..... .... . .... .1
: Ashl~~ttv~teddQwna .......... ndments.'
: Alld.rep'at;~d..the coun.,;IIQrs.
Was this news new to you? Many who 'read
the papers' to 'keep up' on local news didn't see
these power shifts coming, though planned for
months. You've been misinformed.
Local media are part of the problem.
They've failed their role in a democracy--to
educate voters, expose the hidden truth about
government, and empower informed choice.
Instead of being a check and balance on growing
government power, they've misinformed, mis-
quoted, and misled the people.
...Of The People is part of the solution. It
provides accurate City government information
and empowers choice. Government and publi~
servant accountability, without personal attacks.
A regular newspaper published online and in
hard copy, ...Of The People is distributed without
cost to every Ashland neighborhood. With copies
at newsstands, grocery stores, coffee shops, and
SOU Library, this free newspaper reaches
every interested Ashland voter and taxpayer.
The circulation is 3 times the size of the not-
quite-daily, which is owned by Dow Jones, a~d
based in New York City.
Measures 15-76,15-77
Show Us The Law!
Ballot Measures' Text Isn't In
The Voters' Pamphlet
Ashland voters expect the full text of
any proposed charter or charter
amendment to be in the Voters'
Pamphlet, so there's no doubt about
what they're voting on.
City didn't submit the official final
ballot measure text for the replace-
ment charter (M 15-77) or charter
amendment (M15-76) to the county
elections officer or city recorder. City
only submitted a measure summary,
alleged in circuit court to be biased.
Ashland voters are being asked to
vote on a replacement charter and
city manager amendment without
the text of either measure being in
the Voters' Pamphlet.
There's No Official Final
Copy Of Ballot Measure Text
The official final copy of these
ballot measures doesn't exist.
On Tue, Apr17, i told council that
Ashland was being asked to vote on 2
ballot measures with no official text. i
asked council to submit the official
final copy to city recorder Barbara
Christensen for storage in the docu-
ment vault to prevent any more
changes. Council didn't address it.
After the meeting, Christensen said
that legal and administration depart-
ments have changed the text several
times since Council approved the bal-
Ilot measures [on Mar6], and that
Isometimes she gets a copy. [These
12 departments benefit from these bal-
Ilot measures.] .
Christensen confirmed there's no
official final copy of either ballot
measure. She confirmed there's no
guarantee the ballot measure text
won't change tomorrow or next
week on City's web site.
Or that she'll receive a copy.
... Of The People .
Last Saturday, while i explained the
ballot in the Plaza, a visitor approached
me. "You just closed your public.
library," she screamed, "And now you
put the power to sell Uthia Park on the
ballot! What kind of people are you?"
Taken aback by her question, i didn't
know what to say. Still don't.
This ballot doesn't sound like the
people of Ashland.
It doesn't reflect the Ashland we know.
To values voters, this ballot is surreal.
It reflects a deep disconnect between
city politics and community integrity.
The May 15, 2007 ballot marks a
low point in Ashland history. Maybe
we'll turn the corner after this
awake to a new reality. We'll ~nly
turn the corner if we find a way for val-
ues voters to govern their eity with the
same integrity that governs their dinner
table.
The proper role ofthe spiritual
community is not pressuring the
government. Or lobbying council. Or
wasting life energy on city politics.
The proper role is to decide.
Values voters are not 'input'.
Values voters make the decision.
As a sovereign community.
On ballot measures.
Two of which are on this ballot.
Ashland City Council has no power to
alter the document that created it.
Ashland's Charter can only be altered
by majority vote of the people.
Council proposed.
Community decides.
It's time for values voters to decide
Ashland's future.
Then work together to bring a high-
er integrity to self-governance.
At Risk--Ashland's Water
You're the other part of the solution. History
teaches us that government power expansion
won't end with this election. To stay informed, join
http://groups.yahoo.com/g rou p/OfThePeople
With this paper, you can become part of
high-integrity self-government. You can find
out what's really going on in Ashland govern-
ment, without the name-calling and un-civil lan-
guage. You can help write and pass ballot meas-
~res serving public interests instead of special
Interests. Those joining the paper receive bite-
size updates weekly. You make the decisions.
Your voice on local issues can now reach all of
Ashland. Email your letter to the editor to
OfThePeople@yahoogroups.com
. Citizen journalism relies on grassroots energy
and the collective wisdom of We The People.
So does democracy.
Art Bullock, Publisher & Editor, ...Of The People
OfThePeopleEditor@yahoo.com
Or dial GUV-DEMOcracy
That's 488-3366'
Page 4
http://groups.yahoo.com/ group/ OjThePeople
Alleged Bias For John Morrison
art bullock, 2007May1
This document alleges that John Morrison has actual
bias and personal bias against the author, who is a party
in this matter. Under Oregon law, Morrison's bias
requires that he be recused. If he fails to recuse himself
for any reason, council is asked to recuse him by roll call
vote.
Magic words aren't. Assistant city attorney Richard
Appicello has repeatedly told council you can avoid a
finding of actual bias by claiming you're unbiased. He
has failed to produce any statutory authority for this
claim. Under Oregon law, actual bias is a finding of fact.
If Morrison is biased, then no magic words from him or
City's legal department alters that fact. No assertions of
being unbiased, or apologies, or 'making up for it', or
rationalizations, or justifications of the bias, or herbal
potions, alters the fact of the bias. Councilors are asked
to not follow Appicello's "magic words" theory without
demonstrated statutory authority for his claim, which
~oes against Oregon law. .
, Evidentiary hearing at LUBA. Council needs to be
aware of the status of bias claims at lUBA. lUBA is an
appeal board and doesn't hear original evidence. It
makes an exception for bias, and will conduct an
evidentiary hearing to determine actual bias; personal
bias, prejudgment bias, etc.. If Morrison is not recused
and this matter goes to lUBA, any party would be
entitled to move for an evidentiary hearing, including
affidavits and deposition testimony, to establish
Morrison's actual bias and required recusal. These
hearings are expensive for all involved.
Evidence for bias is as follows.
1. Personal attack in quasi-judicial hearing.
On Tue 2007 Apr3, during a quasi-judicial hearing on
Schofieidi Monte Vista LID, Morrison personaily and
viciously attacked me verbally, on camera. It occurred
after I asserted a bias claim, which Morrison refused to
allow, claiming it had to be in writing. After a cou~cilor
asserted I had a legal right to speak and assert bias,
Morrison angrily allowed the testimony, then later
attacked me.
2. Arbitrary time limit for bias testimony.
When Morrison allowed my bias testimony, he
arbitrarily limited it to 3 minutes, denying me the time
required to make the assertions, though I spoke quickly
without repetition. Morrison used this tactic to prevent the
full testimony required for the claim. To the author's
knowledge, no one has ever been limited to 3 minutes to
make a conflict of interesUex partelbias claim, and
council has no such rule. The 'rule' was made up to stop
me from making a full claim.
3. Denial of right to speak.
When time came for the public hearing on the merits
of the LID decision, Morrison denied me the right to
speak, claiming I had already spoken. In effect, h.e
claimed I'd 'used up my publiC hearing time' by uSing 3
minutes to assert bias. A councilor said I had a right to
speak on the merits in the public hearing independent of
the bias discussion. Instead of allowing it, Morrison
launched into a vicious, angry, and prolonged personal
attack, making false claims and irrele:vant claims ~aving
nothing to do with the LID. The heanng was teleVised
live, with several replay broadcasts.
4. Unannounced new procedure.
Morrison's new process was not described in advance
so the parties could prepare. It was implemented
without forewarning or legal basis or explanation at the
time. Morrison never said during the bias discussion that
if I spoke then, I would lose my right to speak duri~g the
public hearing on the merits. I wasn't given a chOice ~o
speak during the disclosure period or during the pubhc
hearing, and if I had, I would have asserted such a
forced choice to be illegal and lacking authority.
Required disclosures occur before the public hearing.
Morrison used his unannounced decision to deny me all
rights to speak during the public hearing. He then used
the time that I would have spoken to personally attack
me.
5. Justification based on political pressure.
Morrison claimed that he was getting calls 'every day'
to stop me from speaking. Morrison justified his decis!on
to disallow exercising my constitutional right to speak In
a public hearing, based on pressure from unnamed.
individuals operating behind the scenes to tell MOITIson
to in effect 'shut him up',
6. Second personal attack in the same hearing.
After public hearing closed without my testimony.,
council deliberated. As the vote neared, one counCIlor
said he was voting NO on this LID on procedural
grounds because Morrison had denied m.e the right to
speak on the merits. Morrison launched Into another
personal attack, repeating and magnifying his false
claims and charges.
7. Denied right to rebut
Though Morrison's testimony introduced new 'facts'
after the hearing opportunity closed, Morrison denied me
the right to rebut his false 'facts'. Though opposed by
the LID majority, council foilowed Morrison's angry
outbursts with a 4-2 vote, without my ever having
opportunity to address the merits of the LID or the false
claims in Morrison's personal attacks.
8. Another on-the-spot rule to stop testimony.
In 2006, Morrison's illegally changed meeting
procedures to require the public to disclose, in writing, a
decision maker's bias, conflict of interest, and ex parte
communication. Said rule was specifically targeted at
me, in response to my attempt to legally do so, following
Oregon law, in the Helman Springs Development
planning action.
When I attempted to assert bias, ex parte contact, and
conflict of interest in that planning action, Morrison
invented a new rule that the public, not the
decision maker, had to submit the decisionmaker's
disclosure in writing at the hearing, though there was no
time to hand-write the claim and evidence, which he
refused to allow orally.
Acting as council chair, Morrison declared that
henceforth, parties to a quasi-judicial hearing had to
submit bias claims, ex parte claims, and conflict of
interest claims and in advance of the hearing. This is an
illegal requirement with no demonstrated statutory basis.
Under Oregon law, every quasi-judicial decisionmaker
must recuse himself/herself as necessary and to publicly
state the reasons for recusai. If they fail to properly
disclose or recuse, the public has an opportunity to
request recusal and/or put forward facts in support of
such recusal.
The public's role is strictly responsive. If the
decision maker does as the law requires, there is nothing
remaining for the public to do, in advance or at the
hearing. The public's role only begins with the lack of
proper disclosure and recusal. Morrison exceeded his
authority as chair to create an illegal and oppressive
requirement to shift the burden for disclosure from the
decisionmaker to me.
Morrison invented his new rule specifically to prevent
my submission of bias in the Helman Springs
Development Planning Action, after I attempted to
introduce a conflict of interest and bias claim at the
appropriate time. His arbitrary decision rule showed
actual bias.
9. Unilateral disclosure decision.
Morrison implemented this new rule uniiateraily,
without council discussion or approval. Council, not
mayor, has decision authority over council rules.
Morrison's unilateral actions prevented me from having
any public hearing testimony on the merits of Morrison's
new, illegal rule. Morrison continues to deny the
opportunity of a hearing on the merits for his rule.
10. Surprise procedures.
Morrison implemented this new rule without warning,
using a surprise tactic, knowing that I was going to
respond to the opportunity to address conflict of interest.
He knew this because I had filed some of the relevant
information with Jackson County Circuit Court in the
Nevada Street LID court case, and had attempted to
introduce the same in the Helman Springs Development
case.
Morrison announced his new rule at the meeting where
it had first applied, claiming he would not accept any
verbal testimony, and that charges of ex parte contact,
conflict of interest, and bias had to be written and
submitted to the assistant city attorney rather than the
council. It wasn't possible on the spot to hand-write the
allegations in the time remaining before the
legally-required adjournment time. By this surprise
tactic, Morrison prevented the bias claim from being
asserted.
11. Refusal to disclose COI at every meeting.
Morrison refused to require councilor Alex Amarotico's
conflict of interest (COI) to be disclosed at every
meeting, or at the start of the session, as required by
Oregon law. vVhen I attempted to do so, and to rebut
the claim of a potential conflict of interest, he refused to
allow me to speak, claiming I hadn't submitted
Amarotico's conflict of interest disclosure information in
writing in advance.
12. Attempt to shift blame.
In the Park St Apts planning action, Morrison voted to
approve findings that tried to blame me and another for
City's admitted failure to meet the 120-day deadline.
Morrison, who as mayor is responsible for council's
schedule and Planning Dept working within the law,
scheduled the appeal to council after City claimed the
120 days had expired. I, and another appellant, filed the
appeal in less time than the law allowed. Appicello, who
is supervised by Morrison, wrote the findings to blame
the appellants, then attempted to use the ensuing court
case to shift the financial responsibility for paying
attorney fees for missing the deadline to me and
another. The findings were false, not based on
substantial evidence in the record, and written to
damage me, and the other appellant. It's City's
responsibility to manage the schedule to finish all
appeals within 120 days. Instead, under Morrison's
direction, this particular planning application was delayed
until near the end of the period, and when the expected
appeal occurred, Morrison blamed me for missing the
deadline. In the ensuing writ of mandamus case, under
Morrison's guidance, Appiceilo tried to shift the burden
for any attorney fees required as a result of missing the
deadline to be paid by the appellants. That case is still
in circuit court.
13. Handling of alleged improper roles.
In Jan2004, in the Nevada Citizens Panel, Morrison,
then councilor, attended a meeting where I presented a
handout alleging inappropriate roles for Planning
Department, Public Works Dept, and misuse of city
equipment and resources for personal use. Morrison
interrupted me, saying this was a legal matter and that
he would take care of it, then he did nothing about it. As
a result, others and I were targets of repeated verbal
assaults. These verbal assaults during the meeting
escalated to threats of violence outside the meeting. A
complaint to city administrator Gino Grimaldi received no
constructive response. Morrison knew about the verbal
assaults, took responsibility to respond, then faiied to
act constructively to stop the improper behavior.
14. A new rule, applied only to me.
In summer and fall 2006, Morrison invented a new rule
that applied only to me. In the few minutes before a
summer councii meeting, Morrison saw that I was going
to show a short video clip of the deposition of Nevada
LID piOject manager Jim Olson. Video showed that
Public Works Director Paula Brown had instructed him to
use cost-sharing percentages that favored her and the
Billings developer who improved her real estate property
inside Nevada LID, and that Olson knew those
percentages to be illegal when she directed him to use
them, yet failed to inform council or property owners of
that key fact. When Morrison learned I was going to
expose the facts, he invented a new rule, applying only
to me, that I would henceforth not be allowed to use any
audiovisuals in my testimony. He claimed I could speak
and couldn't show any exhibits. He only applied that rule
to me, allowing others to use audiovisual aids to help
their presentation. He prevented me from presenting the
video clip at multiple council meetings, including the
court-ordering findings session on Nevada LID.
15. Failure as appointing authority.
As mayor, Morrison is Pauia Brown's boss. She's
required by Oregon law to disclose all conflicts of interest
in Nevada LID, yet Morrison fails to require her to do so.
City admitted in writing, as found by Jackson County
Circuit Court, that Morrison knew of 8 conflicts of interest
for Brown. As her appointing authority, he's required by
law to dispose of her conflicts of interest after disclosure,
and has failed to do so, showing bias and refusal to
follow the law.
16. Anow personal attacks on listserve.
In 2005, lied formation of a community organization
that used civil dialogue to reach consensus on 5
proposed amendments to the Ashland City Charter.
VI/hen the community consensus was incompatible with
City's Charter Review Committee's answer, committee
merl1bers began personaliy attacking me and the civil
dialogue group. I met with Morrison and asked him as
mayor to stop the use of tax money for broadcasting
un-civil discourse, filthy language, and personal attacks
on City's web site against me and
AshlandConstitution.org. I printed and gave to him
emails from the corporate charter committee, showing
him the filthy language, attribution of motives,
name-calling, and false claims. My requests to Morrison
received no constructive response, and the destructive
comments continued until the corporate committee
stopped meeting in June 2005. This spring, when
council put 2 charter measures on the ballot, the attacks
returned and escalated, personally attacking me again
by name, using tax money to broadcast the attacks on
multiple Iistserves. Morrison failed to stop continued
verbal abuse coming from members of the corporation,
and directed to me. Instead he poured gas on the fire
during the 2007Apr3 hearing, claiming' received 'special
treatment' .
17. SummaFY.
Evidence above shows Morrison has actual bias, with
personal animosity, abuse of power directed to me, and
procedural injustice directed at me. Oregon law requires
a quasi-judicia! hearing to have an impartial
decision maker, without personal animosity toward a
party or procedural prejudice. Morrison's outbursts,
personal attacks, invention of unfair procedures, surprise
tactics, and violation of the basic constitutional right to
speak during a public hearing provide adequate
evidence that Morrison is personally biased against me.
For more than 3 years, Morrison has shown personal
bias against me. The personal attack outbursts during
the 2007 Apr3 quasi-judicial hearing are the most recent
and visible since they show on video his personal bias
and his willingness to invent rules on the spot to prevent
my testimony. Council should recuse Morrison from this
matter as having personal bias.
Oregon Supreme Court: ..The public
interest in appearance of propriety over
public interest in efficiency is so great in
judicial proceedings that readjudication is
required regardless of whether decisions
were fair when appearance of impropriety
is present... 1000 Friends of Oregon v.
Wasco County Court, 304 Or. 76, 742 P.2d
39, 1987.
Alleged Bias For Kate Jackson
art bullock, 2007May1
This document alleges actual bias for Kate
Jackson and asks that she be recused .
Jackson has repeatedly demonstrated
personal bias against the author, who is a
party in this matter. Jackson has also
demonstrated prejudgment bias, for example,
by laughing at the Ashland Charter and
publicly stating that she ignores it because it's
outdated. Under Oregon law. Jackson's bias
requires that she be recused. If she fails to
recuse herself, the other 5 councilors are
asked to recuse her by roll call vote.
1. Recusal due to personal bias.
Kate Jackson shows personal animosity,
yelling at me repeatedly in public during
canvassing, spreading false information,
making personal attacks, and working to
discredit me. Kate Jackson's personal bias
against me means she is not an impartial
decisionmaker for this planning action,
because i am a party to the appeal.
I'm the publisher of a newspaper called
...Of The People. The most recent edition
reported on the first page, above the fold, that
Kate Jackson was the councilor who moved
to put on the ballot a charter that would
transfer power to sell Lithia Park from the
voters to council. This means that Kate
Jackson. recently elected with major financial
contributions from developers, would have
the power to sell part or all of Lithia Park to a
developer if joined by 3 others on council.
Kate Jackson has had a vicious personal
attack on me. She is attacking me in public,
including yelling at me on the street while she
canvasses to get her charter version passed.
On Sat 2007 Apr24, while I distributed my
newspaper to Quiet Village, Jackson came to
the neighborhood. She saw me at an
intersection, and proceeded to yell across the
intersection at me with an angry, hostile tone
of voice. Saying nothing, I crossed the street
and moved to another street.
Jackson then came to the street that I was
on. When she arrived, to avoid conflict, I
stopped and waited on the other side of the
street for her to complete her flyer drop. She
continued the verbal harassment. I was on
the other side of the street, houses away.
She would drop her flyers, and as she
returned to the street between each house,
would yell angrily at me across the street,
taunting me, trying to provoke a conflict,
claiming I was going to pick up her flyers,
etc.. Through all her yelling and provocation,
I said nothing I and resumed my work after
she left.
On Sun 2007 Apr25, I RSVP'd to the host of
a meeting on the ballot measures, who invited
me to attend the session at his home. When
I arrived, he said Kate Jackson told them I
was foilowing her, though she failed to explain
that she arrived on a street where I was
already canvassing. She said she didn't want
me to speak to the visitors. I was allowed to
listen to her many false comments about the
charter ballot measures, and wasn't allowed
to speak. She used her fear tactics to stop
any dissenting voice to her factually incorrect
comments. She didn't mention that she had
repeatedly yelled at me on the street, though I
had said nothing.
Jackson is apparently working for a PAC
(Political Action Committee) called
Committee For Responsible Government,
which advocates support for one or both
ballot measures. She is actively using
PAC-paid materials to do her work.
After working to prevent the truth about the
ballot measures from coming out, Jackson
proceeded to use taxpayer-paid resources to
attack me by name on City's listserve, falsely
claiming that I was using fear tactics. She is
twisting the situation 1800. My newspaper
properly reported factual information about
her motion, her vote, and her proposed power
shift from the voters to her and 3 other council
members.
While relying on the PAC to support her
work, Jackson is now violating the law by
using government resources and City's
listserve to personally attack me with false
information, and advocate for her cause,
using her position in the government and
taxpayer resources for her personal agenda.
She is spreading false rumors and false
information, and acting to prevent me from
factually correcting her repeated
misinformation about the ballot measures she
is campaigning for. She is actively working to
personally attack me in public, to discredit
me, and to use her political power, PAC
material, and taxpayer resources in City
government to attack me and discredit me.
Jackson is not an impartial decision maker
for this action, which I asked council to
appeal. Because of her personal bias against
me, she should be recused.
2. Recusal due to prejudgment bias.
Jackson also shows prejudgment bias,
which is separate and cumulative grounds for
recusa!. Jackson told the Mountain Meadows
Democrats meeting on the charter
(2DD? Apr24) that she ignored the Ashland
Charter because it was out of date, and gave
the group a specific section that she ignored.
She laughed at our charter, claiming it wasn't
a working document.
Ashland Charter requires that Kate
Jackson swear to an oath of office that she
will uphold the Ashland Charter, as well as
the constitutions of State or Oregon and the
United States of America. Yet she maintains,
in public, that she ignores the Ashland
Charter because it's outdated. This is a
violation of her oath of office.
We are a nation of laws. Instead of
laughing at the Ashland Charter, she's
required by oath to uphold it, whether or not
she agrees with it.
Jackson's public position that she ignores
the Ashland Charter because it's outdated is
prejudgment bias because it shows she's
willing to violate her oath of office when it
suits her to ignore the law.
A key issue for Planning Action
2006-02354 (P6-2354) is City's continued
ignoring of the 20' setback requirement in
Ashland Municipal Code. During the public
hearing, Planning Commission (PC) chair
John Fields said that PC had ignored the
legally required setback for decades. Not
years, decades.
I asked council to bring this matter up on its
own appeal in part because of PC's continued
and admitted ignoring of city law. Kate
Jackson's public position that she also
ignores city law is prejudgment bias on
P6-2354 to ignore the 20' setback and
variance requirements, and is thus grounds
for recusal.
3. Summary.
The evidence shows Jackson's actual bias,
personal animosity and personal bias, and
prejudgment bias in her willingness to ignore
city law when she considers it outdated. She
is personally and repeatedly attacking me in
public streets and on City's listserve, using
false information. Oregon law requires an
impartial quasi-judicial decision maker, without
personal animosity toward a party or
prejudgment bias. Jackson is not impartial.
She should be recused.
Oregon Supreme Court: "The public
interest in appearance of propriety over
public interest in efficiency is so great in
judicial proceedings that readjudication is.
required regardless of whether decisions
were fair when appearance of impropriety
is present." 1 000 Friends of Oregon v.
Wasco County Court, 304 Or. 76, 742 P.2d
39, 1987.
Alleged Bias For Cate Hartzell
alt bullock, 2007May1
This document asks that Cate Hartzell be
recused in the quasi-judicial hearing for
Nevada Street UD for actual bias. HartzeH
has personal bias and prejudgment bias in
Nevada LID.
(1) Personal involvement. Hartzell acted
as facilitator of 4 Nevada Citizens Panel
meetings, and was personally involved in the
design and process. Several in the group,
deciding that Hartzell was guiding them to
accept Public Works Director Paula Brown's
approach, found Hartzell to be biased, and
asked that she be replaced with a neutral
facHitator. Hartzell should be recused for her
personal involvement in the project, which
showed personal bias.
(2) Failure as appointing authority. As a
councilor, Hartzell is Brown's appointing
authority. Brown is required by Oregon law to
disclose all conflicts of interest in Nevada LID,
yet Hartzell fails to require her to do so. City
admitted in writing, as found by Jackson
County Circuit Court, that Hartzell knew of 8
conflicts of interest for Brown. As her
appointing authority, Hartzell is required by
law to dispose of Brown's conflicts of interest
after Brown's disclosure, and has failed to
require such disclosure. Hartzell should be
recused for personal and prejudgment bias
based on her failure to properly act as
Brown's appointing authority.
(3) Failure to disclose ex parte contact.
Hartzell and Brown worked closely on Nevada
St LID for months. When the official property
owner list became public, the neighborhood
discovered that Brown was a property owner
in the LID and hadn't disclosed this. This
meant all communication between Hartzell
and Brown for months and years regarding
Nevada LID was ex parte communication.
Hartzell is required by law to disclose all
communication with Brown regarding Nevada
LID, including Brown's conflicts of interest,
and has not done so. Hartzell did not
respond to my public records request for all
emails between Hartzell and Brown. Hartzell
has failed to put in the record for this
proceeding all her ex parte communication.
Hartzell's communication with Brown was
so extensive and longstanding that it may be
impossible for Hartzell to satisfy the law
requiring her to put into the record for our
rebuttal the content of all communication with
Brown. Hartzell's boss-subordinate
relationship with Brown further clouded the
situation and increased the bias.
Hartzell also worked closely with Jim
Olson, who deposition testimony showed was
acting as Brown's subordinate to knowingly
violate the law and thereby provide a financial
benefit to Brown and the Billings developer
who improved Brown's property. City
admitted, and the court found, that this.
financial benefit was illegal. Because the
record shows that Olson acted as an agent
for Brown's personal financial interests,
Hartzell should also disclose the content of all
communication with Olson.
The parties have been denied the right to
rebut the extensive communication between
Hartzell and Brown. Hartzell should be
recused for personal and prejudgment bias if
she is unwilling or unable to put into the
record, with our opportunity to rebut, the
content of several years of face-to-face,
telephone, email, etc. communication with
Paula Brown, directly and through Olson,
related to Nevada LID, including funding,
conflict of interest, bike lanes, bicycle safety,
Billings subdivision involvement, cost-sharing
distribution between property owners and
City, etc..
This is also a request that Hartzell state for
the record the date and circumstances when
she first learned that Brown was an LID
property owner, making all communication
between Hartzell and Brown ex parte.
Alleged Bias For David Chapman
art bullock, 2007May1
This document asks that David Chapman
be recused in the quasi-judicial hearing for
Nevada Street LID for actual bias. Chapman
has prejudgment bias against Nevada LID.
He acted as 'facilitator' of several Nevada
Citizens Panel meetings, pushing the
neighborhood to install bumpouts because he
liked them. When the neighborhood found
out that he was going behind their backs to
meet privately to report on the meetings to
Project Manager Jim Olson, neighbors
dis-invited Chapman from being facilitator,
and to my knowledge he never returned.
When he was 'facilitator', Chapman
allowed government employees to verbally
attack attendees. In meeting after meeting,
he refused to stop the repeated verbal attacks
on those who opposed City's push for
bumpouts. The verbal attacks were so
extreme that some long-tenure neighbors
moved out of Ashland. Because of
Chapman's personal involvement in the
design and process of Nevada St LID, he is
not an impartial decisionmaker.
Chapman also has prejudgment bias based
on his argument to council that council
shouldn't follow the Ashland Street Standards
Handbook, which is ruling law for street
improvements. Chapman's oath of offic.e
requires that he follow the law, whether or not
he agrees with the law. Under Oregon law,
Chapman's actual bias requires that he be
recused. If he fails to recuse himself, the
other councilors are asked to recuse him by
roll call vote.