|
THE ASTROTURF IS GREENER
I feel compelled to respond to the Nigel Jaquiss article ("The Grass Is Always Greener," WW, June 10, 1998) on the proposed Portland State University Community Recreation Field. The article omitted key information about the project. First, as I explained to Mr. Jaquiss several times during our interview, this project is a Community Recreation Field, not simply a football and soccer practice field for the PSU Department of Athletics. Use of the field, since it was first proposed in June 1997, has always been geared for a variety of groups: PSU intramural and club sports, PSU students, neighborhood groups, local residents and PSU athletic teams. The field also may be used by schoolchildren if a proposed public elementary school is constructed near the university. Second, there is no specific stipulation in Peter Stott's gift to the PSU athletics department saying that the athletics department has priority for the field. Scheduling of the field's use will be determined by an advisory board that already determines use of the Stott Center physical education building's gyms, pool and other facilities. While school is not in session, recreational users will have priority at all times. The board is proposing a block scheduling system that will give academic and instructional users, PSU sports teams and recreationists priority scheduling at certain times of the day while school is in session. Under the proposal, recreationists would have priority all weekend long and after 6 pm weekdays. Academic and instructional users would have priority during weekday morning hours, and the PSU athletics department would have priority during weekday afternoons. Finally, Mr. Jaquiss failed to mention that by using artificial turf and a new drainage system for the proposed field, the field will be available for student and local sports groups' use every day of the year. Current use of the field/open area is greatly limited due to wet grounds and Portland's many rain days. Brian White
PSU Office of Marketing and Communications Nigel Jaquiss responds:George Pernsteiner, PSU's vice president of finance and administration, told WW that the Stott gift required "priority scheduling for athletics." As Mr. White's letter makes clear, PSU athletics teams will get priority of the new field on weekday afternoons. THE SOUND OF SILENCE
It used to be when I heard the words "conspiracy of silence," I either laughed or just wished the public health officer would add Thorazine to the municipal water supply. However, what happened in connection with Robert Richter's film about the School of the Americas makes me wonder. As your story "No See TV" [Buzz, WW, June 17, 1998] states, Bob is a former Portlander and Public Broadcasting worker. I have known him for something like 40 years, since he was a drama major at Reed. He has since compiled a distinguished record as a television producer, having started under Edward R. Murrow. He is also well-known among Reedies for having fought for decades to have the college receive the dismissal of Dr. Stanley Moore--a story which the daily paper covered extensively and to which OPB devoted a segment on Oregon Considered. Aside from this "local boy makes good" element, there is also the other Portland connection, i.e., that one of the protesters imprisoned for trespassing on Fort Benning, where the school is situated, is from here. But the basic issue is one of national importance: As I understand it, some Latin American governments, nominally/allegedly/supposedly free and democratic, use their armies to suppress the legitimate aspirations of the poor. I submit that it is for the electorate to decide whether the United States Army should be training people for this purpose, and there apparently is a movement afoot in Congress to de-fund the school. Trespassing and other civil disobedience methods may, tactically, be less than optimally effective, but I can see some justification for their use if there really exists an attitude on the part of the mainstream media--whether a conspiracy or just a belief that the story won't play in Peoria--not to give any publicity to an important subject. I can attest to the fact I telephoned half a dozen radio show producers, both commercial and OPB, and left extensive messages regarding Bob Richter's film. As a lawyer, I believe I can articulate in a minimally articulate way, and so expected at least one or two call backs. The actual score: zip. Your reporter is to be congratulated for having at least got Mr. Doggett of OPB to say something on the record, wishy-washy though it was. Ivan J. Vesely
Northeast Couch Street BELOW THE BELT
With regard to Erik Sten's ticket for a seat-belt violation ["Cops Belt Sten," Buzz, WW, June 17, 1998], the question he and we should all be asking is: Does government have the right to legislate such a law in a free society? The answer is no! I refuse to wear a seat belt unless I think it necessary. I haven't strapped in for years, and won't unless I want to. It's my choice. If you get pulled over, fellow citizens, simply get out of the vehicle immediately. The officer can't say you're not belted in if you are standing beside your car. Cops have better things to do and should be made aware of that. They are our servants and should concentrate on catching bad guys. Society would be better served if it made laws to protect you from me, protect me from you, but never laws to protect me from myself. With contempt for any law that purports to protect me from my own decision, I remain a patriotic Viet Nam vet and regular citizen worried about way too much governmental control over our private business. Erik Sten should ask a lot more questions. Rod Folen
Southwest Taylors Ferry Road LEARN BY EXAMPLE
Some decision makers consider [Jim] Howell a little too far-sighted for advocating a subway to accommodate regional light rail through the central city ("The Rumble That Wasn't," WW, June 24, 1998). Under his low-cost, interim plan, [south-north light rail] would cross on the Hawthorne Bridge, turn north on 1st Avenue and connect to the existing MAX on Yamhill and Morrison; they claim ridership would slump because people would have to walk four or five blocks to the big office buildings on Southwest 5th and 6th avenues. Not so--MAX trains could connect to the transit mall and could easily go to 11th and proceed back north or south: the full interchange at 1st and Morrison and Yamhill provides full flexibility for good service, as a beginning. Planners also claim a subway, though allowing longer and faster trains--most important for regional rail--takes people off the streets and puts them underground (only while they are on the train!) which is not what the city wants in terms of urban form and activity on the street. If urban form and activity on the streets is the object, why not close some streets to automobile traffic instead of constricting regional rail? It is the automobile that conflicts with people, not a regional rail underground! People are wedded to the automobile because the alternative is still too slow, infrequent and therefore inconvenient, if it is available at all. Planners need to concentrate on assisting transit, buses and rails, not on making better the all-too-comfortable, convenient, ubiquitous automobile; the real problem is too many automobiles competing with people with little choice! Choose a low-cost, interim solution for now for S/N; do not waste 200 to 300 millions of scarce dollars on a downtown surface route doomed to be totally inadequate a few short years away. Cross the Hawthorne Bridge, hook on to the existing MAX, go to Vancouver within the existing moneys and begin serious planning to accommodate ALL regional rail underground in the central city; learn from Seattle, Vancouver, B.C., San Francisco and that best medium-size transit system of Toronto, Canada; learn from the experience of more mature cities and save money, time and quality of life. R.J. Polani, co-chairman,
Citizens for Better Transit
Southeast Ankeny Street |
