I just received my voter's pamphlet and I read the explanatory statement and all nine arguments for and against the $8.5 million police station bond (Measure 3-377). My argument against is that last one printed on the police bond issue, and you'll find it on page 19 of your voter's pamphlet.

I hope it will make the most sense to West Linn voters. The police do need a new station, but it doesn't have to be so large and expensive. I hope that my argument will get voters to ask themselves a lot of relevant questions which may include:

Why buy the land for $1.5 million when we could build it on the footprint where it is already located near I-205 and Highway 43?

We could build it from scratch there and pay for the parking area needed for a fraction of the cost of this huge bond. Or we could build it on one of the several properties the city already owns.

Why make it four times as large as the existing station when twice the size would work just fine? Aren't we already just 5,385 people away from building out? Is it possible that it's been quadrupled in size to serve the development of Stafford Triangle, which over 70 percent of West Linn citizens surveyed do not want to happen?

Why include community meeting rooms when there are already several available for use that are both privately and publically owned?

Why ask people who are already financially strapped to spend almost four times as much as they need to pay to build a new facility for our police department?

We've already been asked once to vote for a police station bond that was too big and too expensive, and the majority who voted said no. I think that we should just say no again and ask that a smaller, less costly police station bond be brought to the citizens for a vote next time around.

Thanks for your consideration of this idea.

Bob Adams is a former West Linn city councilor and

a West Linn resident.

Go to top
Template by JoomlaShine