Quinsey was an asset to Pios
I am extremely disappointed to hear of Todd Quinsey's dismissal from the Sandy High School football program.
Quinsey is a class act, and he also possesses an excellent football mind. I would very much like to know the reasons behind (Sandy athletic director) Courtney Murphy's decision to end his tenure - she at least owes the players on the team such an explanation.
What's not to like about coach Quinsey? He is friendly, candid and real, and he is quite capable of developing raw talent. (If Ms. Murphy and the administrators at Sandy haven't yet noticed, one of Quinsey's recent protégés, Michael T. Lynch, from Sandy, is following in the footsteps of NFL rookie tight end Kevin Boss at Western Oregon University. That's no small feat, considering Boss was instrumental in bringing a world championship to the New York Giants this year.)
From my vantage point, it looks as though the Sandy athletic program has made yet another embarrassing blunder.
I can only imagine how exasperated Quinsey's hard-working peers must feel when this sort of baffling nonsense constantly rears its ugly head.
Larry is right about growth
Regarding Larry Zimmerman's letter to the editor in the Feb. 27 issue of the Sandy Post, which was critical of local growth, may we say, 'Good for you, Larry.'
Although we live outside the city limits of Sandy, it is still our town. We have lived here for 36 years and seen it grow by leaps and bounds in recent years.
It used to be a small, friendly town where you always saw people you knew when going to the post office or shopping. That isn't so any more. Why didn't Linda Malone and her henchmen move to Gresham in the first place instead of bringing Gresham here?
PATRICK and DONNA MARLOW
Sandy Style creates big burden
In regards to the article about the city adopting design standards, I'd like to share a few thoughts. I must preface these comments with the statement that I truly like the concept of Sandy Style architecture, however, if the city is going to mandate these design standards, I believe the city should shoulder the burden of the additional costs.
Having consulted with several architects, builders and designers, the consensus is that costs would increase 20 to 25 percent to meet the new standards imposed by Sandy Style. In new construction, some regional or national chains that have their own funding may elect to locate here even with the higher associated costs.
However, for the small business owner or property owner such as myself, who has to go to a financial institution for funding, this plan has a fatal flaw. Because of the higher associated costs, the project will not pencil out, so the financial institution will not fund the project, which means the building doesn't get built. Perhaps if the city was looking for a building moratorium, they've accomplished that without labeling it as such.
Then there's the issue of existing buildings. I cannot imagine many property owners remodeling an existing building under Sandy Style guidelines without some significant financial assistance from the city. It's just not going to happen.
I hope that five years from now the city has multiple examples for Sandy Style projects. In the event it doesn't happen, I hope the city council will either make Sandy Style optional or provide the financial incentives to make it work.
Again, I really like and appreciate Sandy Style architecture, but feel it places too much of a financial burden on the small business or property owner.
Questions for the community
I have some questions that I think the residents of the city of Sandy and myself want answered.
First, to Hollis MacLean-Wenzel: To compare Sandy with Sisters, Ore., or Leavenworth, Wash., is not fair. Both Sisters and Leavenworth have year-round attractions for vacationers. Sandy has two attractions - the Mountain Festival (for one weekend a year), and the one year-round attraction known from Washington to Northern California and from the Pacific Ocean to Idaho: Joe's Donuts. What else do we have to offer as an attraction?
To the building contractors: There are houses that are sitting empty. An auction was held in December and now another (was) held in March to remove some of these houses from the market. Why are more houses being built?
To the mayor and City Council: With all the empty houses in Sandy, why are the contractors still being allowed to build? When the building permits expire, do not renew them. What is the city doing about water to supply the new homes and the existing ones? Shouldn't the people who are users of the city's water supply be kept informed? What happened to the permit or permits to draw water from the Salmon River?
Now is the time to plan for future water supplies and storage.
Residents of the city of Sandy, do you want to be on limited water use? Do you want your streets to fall into further disrepair?
Stop the building in the city of Sandy. More houses mean more cars and more traffic means more street repair. Vote against all future annexations into the city of Sandy.
Let us keep Sandy the small, livable city that it is meant to be.