New chocolate shop opening in LO

The buzz around town is that there is a new chocolate shop opening in Lake Oswego. It’s called Mirolo: Mi for Michael, Ro for Rose and LO for, well, Lake Oswego.

Michael and Rose are the vision and backing behind Mirolo. It will be run by an up-and-coming young pastry chef, Lisa Daschel, who, for one so young, has an extremely sophisticated palate, and her assistants.

All of this has been done under the tutelage and guidance of Ian Titterton, former head chocolatier at Moonstruck and current head of the professional baking program at Clark College in Vancouver, Wash.

Don’t miss visiting, they’re on the corner of Kruse Way and Boones Ferry Road.

Alison Dolder

West Linn

Vote yes on charter amendments

1. Make city attorney a council-appointed charter officer: A common provision in Oregon city charters and will codify our current practice. Having the attorney responsible and accountable to the council and not the manager is a prudent check and balance in city government.

2. All annexations require voter approval: I disagree with this absolute requirement, nevertheless, it reflects the majority view of our citizens.

3. Council and municipal judge vacancies filled at next available May or November elections: The current charter requires this election to fill the judge’s unexpired term. When the calendar and a vacancy results in a special election in September when a general November election is also to be held, it results in added expense to the city to hold the election and can confuse voters as to why the expense and what is “going on.”

4. Councilors not to interfere with personnel and contracting decisions: A common understanding in our city but not clearly stated and has not always been honored in the past. Administrative activities are the manager’s responsibilities; keep employees accountable to the manager and the manager accountable to the council as a whole. Like most city charters, let’s have this common requirement in clear charter language.

Jim Mattis

West Linn

Sustainable Life article is challenged

Your article about forest certification programs (“Pulp Fiction?” Sustainable Life insert in the Aug. 15 West Linn Tidings) painted an inaccurate portrait of the Sustainable Forestry Initiative and left out many important facts, including several that I discussed with reporter Steve Law when interviewed for this article.

As an Oregonian running a fourth-generation family logging business, I care passionately about the health of our forests and want to make sure they thrive for generations to come. I’m also committed to protecting our watersheds and wildlife habitats, which every community in the state depends on.

The science-based SFI Standard has become the leading one in Oregon, and throughout North America, in improving responsible forestry practices to meet those goals. It requires practices that protect fish and wildlife, ensure clean water and soil and result in sustainable, healthy working forests.

The critical difference between SFI and other certification programs is that SFI’s network of regional implementation committees actively work to train loggers and others in best practices. Only by engaging with those doing the work on the ground can an organization make a difference in the forest. SFI makes a difference and is recognized for its community network and its logger training, its best management practices for water quality and soil protection and much more.

Also, by excluding SFI from credit under Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED), the U.S. Green Building Council is actually taking jobs away from Oregonians who practice responsible forestry. It’s wrong economically and ecologically.

It is disappointing to me that the author of the article had an opinion he was forcing on everyone without listening to and reporting on the opinions of those he interviewed. As an Oregonian, I expect more from the Portland Tribune.

Bob Luoto


Almost totalitarian action

Your editorial (“No one has ‘right’ to drink in public parks,” Aug. 22) states that although the Clackamas County Board of Commissioners exaggerated reports of mass riots and drownings on the Clackamas River in order “to pass new rules ... it was the correct decision.”

I strongly disagree. There was no basis to declare an emergency; their action was unfounded and heavy handed. The commissioners should have instead called for a round of several public-input meetings, gathered the real facts and made an informed decision.

Instead they overreached their authority and took what I consider to be an almost totalitarian action.

Frank Heaton

Unincorporated Oregon City

Who wouldn’t support background checks?

Guns don’t kill people, people kill people. We’ve all heard that one.

So why wouldn’t thinking people support background checks on gun buying? As a gun owner and even a former NRA member, it seems a no-brainer. I’m guessing the nonsupport mostly comes from those who will never vote for anything adding to government involvement. Sad.

Lisa Cohns

Lake Oswego

Debs mom deserves credit

Regarding the Dash With the Debs, I feel my mom should be mentioned (as) she organized it. She did have a great team. She was up late many, many nights making plans.

Her name is Tonia Zito.

A. Zito

West Linn

Concerns raised about Sustainable Life article’s accuracy

Your recent article about forest certification (“Pulp fiction?” Sustainable Life insert in the Aug. 15 West Linn Tidings) missed important facts about the Sustainable Forestry Initiative.

First, SFI is an independent organization governed with equal representation from conservation, economic and social stakeholders. You cited Forest Stewardship Council’s supporters but did not report that SFI’s board of directors includes representatives of The Conservation Fund, Ducks Unlimited Canada, Bird Studies Canada, the Manomet Center for Conservation Studies, the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership, several academic foresters and the state forester of Maryland.

Second, the notion that an FSC-labeled product indicates the product comes from land in which clear-cuts have been restricted to “6 acres” is inaccurate. FSC actually has no clear-cutting restrictions over at least 45 percent of the land certified to that standard, including in Russia, Sweden, Brazil and parts of Canada.

On conversion of forestland to other uses, there is no significant difference between SFI and FSC. Both require participants to exclude lands slated for development from certified areas.

On chemical use, the SFI Standard requires use of chemicals to be the least toxic and narrowest spectrum pesticides and herbicides to achieve forest management objectives and to use integrated pest management wherever feasible. Meanwhile, FSC has granted at least 74 exemptions for companies to use “FSC-banned” chemicals, which leaves consumers in doubt about the veracity of FSC claims to forbid these chemicals.

SFI also promotes responsible forestry in many ways other than through the standard: through our chain of custody and certified sourcing labels; by investing in conservation research; by working directly with communities to promote sustainable practices; and through the innovative Forest Partners program.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture, the National Association of State Foresters and other authorities have said the SFI, FSC and other credible certification programs all can be accepted as evidence of sustainable forestry. The reason that “academics and government foresters are avoiding the fight,” as your article put it, is that they know that the differences between SFI and FSC are insignificant compared with the need to promote responsible, science-based forest practices, regardless of the specific approach.

Kathy Abusow

President and CEO, Sustainable Forestry Initiative Inc.

Washington, D.C., and Ottawa, Ontario

Contract Publishing

Go to top
Template by JoomlaShine