Featured Stories

Other Pamplin Media Group sites

Letters

Thanks, WL Community Concerts sponsors

To the Editor:

(The following is from a letter read to city council on Monday night.)

Countdown is four days to the 50-year mark on the West Linn Old Time Fair and the brand new stage is beautiful.

The West Linn Community Concerts 2006 will stage five nonpareil bands: tribal drummers and grass dancers from the Confederated Tribe of Grande Ronde, Global F.M., ItsaWhale from the San Francisco Bay area, the Painted Hags, playing Irish rock, and The States, an all-girls band.

These free concerts are being made possible from generous sponsors supporting me in raising funds to accomplish the West Linn Community Concerts this year.

My thanks go to Renaissance Homes, J.T. Smith, Co., Centurion Homes, Icon Development, Ken Olson Development, Gramor Development, West Linn Chamber of Commerce, the West Linn Tidings, and also to S.F.W.W. Board, Safeway of West Linn, Bales Marketplace of West Linn, Pro GraFix and my favorite sign guys - did I forget someone? I hope not. To all my sponsors and supporters I give my most gracious thank you! More concerts are to come in September.

Alice Richmond

West Linn

Superintendent's new contract inappropriate

To the Editor:

The approval of a new employment contract by the School Board for Superintendent Woehl that includes a salary increase and incentives based on his performance review is totally inappropriate for the following reasons:

n The superintendent was given 'high marks' for management of the administrative team. How does one receive 'high marks' when the most recent remodels of West Linn High School and the charter school were nearly $7,000,000 over budget? This does not reflect management by an executive deserving of 'high marks' and a raise.

n 'High marks' were given for emphasis on character education. How do you quantify character education emphasis? It is ironic that character education was part of the evaluation, yet the school board chose to overlook the issue of Superintendent Woehl's state ethics violation.

n There was no mention of our students' performance and achievement academically. It would seem that this would appear at the top of the performance evaluation and how well the superintendent is handling the prime responsibility of educating our students.

The quoted raise for Superintendent Woehl is 5.2 percent or $6,210. However, when the annual incentive of $10,000 is included, the raise is 13.6 percent or $16,210. The raise is totally unwarranted when there are so many deficiencies in performance. How can the school board justify a raise of this magnitude based on this kind of performance?

It is time the school board fulfilled their responsibilities and truly acted as a board in the management of the superintendent and school administration.

Brian Bittke

West Linn

Resident answers Citizen's View criticism

To the Editor:

My June 1 Tidings Citizen's View column pointed out multi-millions of dollars that West Linn and West Linn/Wilsonville School District taxpayers have paid to subsidize growth since 1990 during tenures of city councils prior to 2001 and all school boards up to the present. I also pointed out that these jurisdictions never exerted any organized and continual pressure to get the legislature to stop serving the developer lobby and instead allow charging developers growth impact fees to fund many expensive forms of growth-created infrastructure needs rather than continuing to have taxpayers fund them.

Edward McLean, in his June 8 Tidings column, lambasted my column with far-fetched ramblings that grossly misrepresented it, including wrongly claiming I didn't address the legislature's non-approval of charging developers certain needed impact fees. He also unjustly inferred the Dodds' administration was to blame for the finance director's alleged fraud (which began under Thorn's administration and also continued under King's administration) and her failure to file annual audits. He also thought I was being 'libelous.' He's known to hurl that missile at those who criticize what he wants or who he supports, as he likewise hurled at Roberta Schwartz in his Feb. 2 Tidings column regarding her testimony before city council.

McClean strongly attacked my criticism of this council. Could an important factor in his expressed support of it possibly be related to his still having an ownership interest (as the most recent county and state records indicate) in undeveloped rural land immediately outside our present UGB across from Safeway? Urbanization of rural lands maximizes profit potential for such landowners. Expanding our UGB, as this council is planning on, is one requirement (West Linn voter approval for annexing such lands is another) for extending city water and sewer for urbanization within an expanded UGB.

McLean said I should be quiet and listen to the majority who elected this council. That's like saying Democrats should shut up and listen to those who elected President Bush and the Republican majority in Congress. Apparently, McLean doesn't hold the First Amendment's freedom-of-speech guarantees for all citizens and the press in much regard.

Bob Thomas

West Linn