Loaded Orygun - Recent Comments

In search of solutions...

dgvizzini — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 04:22:41 GMT

Thank you, Joe(?), for acknowledging my comments. I look forward to your reply. That said, I am looking for a fact-based, forward-looking search for solutions that get this job done as quickly, efficiently and effectively as possible. I am looking for contributions to solutions, not ineffective and non-productive bashing of City Council or City staff. I am looking for contributions to this discussion that are informative and advance the work that needs to get done. I'm not interested in opinions, rumors or inuendos. If you have issues about the City's course of action, then express them in clear and concise questions that require factual answers from City officials and staff. They need to be held to account, but in ways that improve the project. If citizens want to complain or raise concerns about the project... fine... but those complaints and concerns must come with constructive solutions that can be tested against the complicated realities of this project. No one gets to throw stones without confronting all of the consequences of their recommendations. There is nothing simple or easy about this. And no one should assume otherwise. We don't have the time or resources, as a community, to entertain recommendations that push the consequences off to others. We need to use this project as an opportunity to bring this community together behind a plan and course of action that authorizes the City to act, aggressively, adaptively and without constant second guessing. This is not to say that we relinquish our responsibility to remain vigilant and engaged. But it does mean that our engagement is focused on the constructive search for solutions as problems and challenges arise. Anything else does harm to us all, as ratepayers and members of this community. Thanks again for your kind consideration. It's about time to move to constructive solutions.

Dan Vizzini

a thoughtful response

torridjoe — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 16:49:26 GMT

thank you for the comment, sir! It's clear you put time and thought into it, and are focused on finding solutions instead of problems. Your response therefore deserves a thoughtful reply--but for the moment I wanted to acknowledge your posting.

Very briefly--I certainly have reached some conclusions about this project, and my reportage carries that filter. But I think you vastly sell short the very specific problems and questions raised that do not simply amount to "we can't swim, and that's bad." The plan actually has concerns that affect all residents in a number of areas.

Again, more when I'm able to fully address your comment. But thank you for yours.

LOIS and the Swim Park

dgvizzini — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 02:36:55 GMT

I have to say I am torn by this string of articles about the LOIS and the Swim Park.

On one hand you have done a fine civic service by drilling into the details of the City's attempt to gain access to the lake for the sewer project. You have introduced useful information, some gathered from existing public sites and some collected by your own efforts.

These laudable efforts are offset by a bias that has little if anything to do with the challenge facing our community. It is a disservice to honest public discourse to characterize the testimony received by the LOSD board this week as anything more than the views of a special interest of our community. Their arguments, while heart felt and understandable, are motivated by a narrow focus on their use of the swim park. Unfortunately, the School District board did not hear from cash strapped seniors and the thousands of other ratepayers who are terrified by the double digit increases in sewer rates that will result from this project.

We need a public discussion that reviews and tests the predesign recommendations that form the basis of the City's actions, that honestly weights the costs and benefits of the recommended course of action, and considers the ways of mitigating the community impacts of the project. We need to encourage citizens to move beyond their shock and rage of a process poorly managed, and focus on the difficult, complex and expensive choices that lie ahead.

You predict a one-year delay in the completion of this project. That prediction is almost certain to come true if the community fragments into a collection of special interests hell-bent on pushing the impacts of this project on someone else so that they can protect their own.

Sacrifice is needed from the entire community if we have any hope of getting this project done on time and under budget. We need to find a way to get beyond the current crisis of confidence in a way that allows for transparency and accountability, as well as efficiency and adaptability. If we don't figure this out, this project will drag on, drag down our community and ravage our budgets.

You have a remarkably powerful tool at your hands that can be used for good or ill. We need your insights, intelligence, insights and investigative abilities to advance a positive course of action that gets the job done and holds the costs to a minimum. If you fail to answer this call, I seriously doubt you can continue to refer to Loaded Orygun as Oregon's Progressive Community.

One final note... I have serious problems with civic-minded blogs that allow individuals to post opinions and make comments without any personal responsibility. We should be willing to disclose who we are when we enter into public discourse about issues of long-term and profound importance to our community. This responsibility should start with you and be required of anyone using this powerful communication channel.

Thanks for providing this opportunity to contribute to this important discussion.

Dan Vizzini

great acronym

torridjoe — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 22:49:11 GMT

thanks for sharing your on-point comments--and if that's not an actual name for organized park closure opponents, it oughta be!

and we're still pissed...

PdxPaulie — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 22:10:39 GMT

Considering this project has been in the planning stages for 5 years, one can't help but believe that the use of this park had been a key point from the very beginning. Did they even look at the costs of removing and replacing the North Shore Blvd bridge? They said that seldom used old bridge was the reason at least site was not viable. For those of us who attended the meeting, the school board reactions ranged from disinterested to disagreeable. Lake Oswego Public Affairs Director Jane Heisler shook her head at many citizen comments with an annoyed/puzzled look on her face like she was trying to figure out if the speaker was really as clueless as she thought s/he was. I wasn't the only one to notice that either, and the reactions just made everyone more angry.

None of the articles I've read discuss the Lake Oswego v Lake Grove history. Lake Grove has felt marginalized by the City and the School Board for years, and the closeted agreement to close the only local public access to the lake for at least one season (probably 2, lets be honest) feels like another of many slaps in the face. This two-towns-in-one-city issue is an open wound and whenever there is anything done behind closed doors, its a finger in that wound.

Regarding the project, yes, we all understand it is important to have a viable sewer system. But, what of the trees that will have their roots driven on for 16 months? I sincerely doubt many will survive that abuse and you can't just plant 60' trees. The truly natural space we all enjoy under the canopy will be gone, replaced with small saplings. Maybe our grandkids will see a canopy like we currently enjoy. Until then, it will be like a greenspace in a planned community. Sterile. Nature-less. Groomed.

Do they really believe they can construct a floating pipe concept for the first time ever on-time and within budget? Unlikely, figure at least a year longer than planned. How about constructing a first-time-ever project without any lingering issues that would require maintenance or replacement? Unrealistic - which is why everyone was asking about a permanent access: Once the door opens to use 1/2 of the park, what is to stop the City government, one that is not trusted by Lake Grove residents, to claim they need the 1/2 they were using for ongoing access (date non-specific), but 1/2 the park is still there and they aren't claiming "forever", so the deed isn't violated? Just our access rights and the few remaining trees are.

We speak for the trees... and daydreaming under them
Lake Oswego Residents Against Closing the Swimpark

They'll field someone

skywaker9 — Thu, 17 Jul 2008 01:52:29 GMT

These ratings are entirely based on voter registration, which explains a lot of the Republican districts that show up weaker than most think...

They are not subjective...

House 29?

LarryMcD — Thu, 17 Jul 2008 00:09:54 GMT

I'm curious about whether or not the rating on House 29 took into consideration that Dyuck won't be on the ballot.

I sent Riley some cash after he asked personally (one smart politician) and will send more if he's really in a tossup situation but if you think (as I do) that Dyuck's elimination makes him a lot safer... I'd rather spread the money around.

Comments Welcome!

skywaker9 — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 16:31:18 GMT

Let me know what you think.

Poop on Poop Project

myohmy — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 21:45:39 GMT

In all of the articles I have read, something has been left out.
The Lake Grove Swim Park is for not only the residents of the original Lake Grove area-children and adults, but it is for ALL students of the LOSD. There are 6777 enrolled, according to their website.
Children 8 and above are allowed to go in with out a parent. 12pm-8 pm
Therefore, it will not only affect Lake Grove residents, but all the children.
The City's swim park has only 4-6 chairs and about 8 parking spots. It is on a 1-way road, w/ residents sharing that road.

interesting ACLU scores

petrichor — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 16:46:19 GMT

i wonder what's up with the relatively low ACLU scores for the state house/senate dems?

75%, 67%, 56%, and 50% for
merkley, schrader, brown and westlund, respectively.

wheras the national dems score 100% and gordon smith gets a surprisingly high (for a Rep) 57%, compared to walden's 17%.

i'd love to see the scorecards.