John Ludlow’s op-ed last week, “Don’t try to bully Clackamas County voters on CRC,” offers little but bullying of its own.

The testimony he cites is mine, in which I implored the commission to reject Ludlow’s clumsy resolution to oppose the Interstate 5 Bridge replacement project. I testified that it’s not Clackamas County’s fight, and would only serve to make enemies with our transportation funding partners—on whom we rely for future projects.

His deliberate misinterpretation of my testimony as “threatening” is simple grandstanding to make headlines.

I’m disappointed that Ludlow’s promise to encourage citizen input and involvement has reversed course. Using the media to mischaracterize public testimony of opposing viewpoints discourages participation. I expect more thoughtful and considerate leadership from my county commissioners.

My testimony can be summed up simply: Our county is in constant competition for transportation dollars. Ignoring the political realities of picking a fight with our funding partners isn’t in our best interest.

Patrick Sheehan


Naysayer’s pulpit

John Ludlow appears to have a problem listening to his constituents.

There is a substantial portion of the people in Clackamas County who favor or support a new bridge over the Columbia River at the I-5 crossing (and light rail for Clackamas County). We do believe government should work. We do believe government should represent the views and the best interest of the taxpayers.

Unfortunately, John Ludlow, in his current bully pulpit, appears so far to be a one-trick pony; he can say “Nay.” He certainly does not brook opposition gracefully.

Lester Garrison


End the boondoggle

HB 2800, better known to Oregon voters and citizens as the Columbia River Crossing, is being considered by the Oregon Legislature as a method to replace the Interstate 5 bridge. This proposal commits $450 million from both Oregon and Washington.

The federal government says that it will invest $850 million for light rail on the bridge project only if Oregon and Washington commit the money up front. This bill is not supportive of free markets, and it will increase government.

We need a more fiscal approach in dealing with infrastructure projects. This bill was put on the front-burner in a rush to get it through the House and Senate chambers. This is not a good bill that respects free markets, personal choice, limited government and fiscal responsibility.

I urge every citizen to read the contents of this bill and contact their legislators to vote against this boondoggle spending project.

Kevin Moss


Savas takes ‘high road’

Wow, what a contrast between our two county commissioners, John Ludlow and Paul Savas.

Mr. Savas has the wisdom to know when he doesn’t know enough.

Mr. Ludlow, on the other hand makes a stunning leap on top of a conclusion it is obvious he already held before hearing any testimony. He turns one “citizen’s” fear of governmental “retaliation” into some kind of evidence that we’re being bullied by various government entities (this is in reference to the Columbia River Crossing project).

So even though it is possible Mr. Ludlow’s conclusion may be correct, I’m worried about how he reached it. If you’re going to represent me in this county, your conclusions and actions had better be based on evidence, not hysteria.

Kudos to Mr. Savas for taking the high road.

Gary Duel

Happy Valley

Contract Publishing

Go to top
Template by JoomlaShine