WW welcomes letters to the editor via mail, e-mail or fax. Letters must be signed by the author and include the author's street address and phone number for verification. Preference will be given to letters of 250 words or less. HE'S GOT A FAN IN ME Whoa! Which vertically challenged WW staffer decided we local Randy Newman fans were short-changed people? Sure, his set lacked length, but a little bit of Randy goes a long way. Worth the price of admission were his witty asides about Beaverton High and Nike. Besides, it was a benefit concert and, he said, the first time he'd played for free since he was 17 years old. There are lots of losers due to the steep price of concerts these days (I venture some CSN&Y fans will feel that way), but Randy Newman fans weren't among them last week. Bill Gallagher Lake Oswego LOFTY CONCERNS We just read your article regarding the West End ["West End Story," WW, Dec. 15, 1999]. We live on the corner of Southwest Park Avenue and Clay Street. First of all, we're part of the population-growth problem Portland faces in all districts, not just downtown. My wife and I moved here a year ago from the East Coast, and we have no roots here--but we love our city. We are here to stay and care about what might happen in the next few years to this area. To live in a historic building with a view of the park is a privilege, not a right. I feel lucky to be able to walk three blocks to work daily and not commute. However, we would hate to see the West End become another Pearl District or bus mall. One of the reasons we chose to live downtown rather than in the Irvington District, or Hollywood, or Hawthorne, is that Portland has a downtown that lives. Most cities we considered moving to are either cold and unwelcoming in the downtown core (like Seattle), or the rents are so inflated that most people are priced out of the market. I would hate to see Portland follow in the steps of many other similar cities. It's important to have a residential neighborhood where everyone still walks to the grocery store and confronts one another. Even if we don't have a neighborhood the way, say, New York might have a neighborhood, you still feel as though you live with other people--you don't just exist in a strip-mall vacuum living out your sheltered little life. Worse than suburbia is the idea of making a "false" neighborhood, by building or renovating "lofts" and opening tony, expensive shops, all to cater to the thirtysomething crowd. This concept of gentrification is not really about livability or revitalization--it's just about profits. Income earners who can afford that kind of lifestyle will spend their money close to home (see Northwest 23rd on a weekday--more $30,000 sedans than I care to count). Too many cities sacrifice residential zoning in the name of profits. Certainly the new streetcar will change the landscape around our neighborhood. Parking is still going to be a nightmare. But we don't mind, as long as we aren't squeezed out to make room for an office building or a new condo or Pearl District-style loft. At what cost will developers continue to expand their profits while compressing an already pressured neighborhood? Boaz and Jessica Kirschenbaum Southwest Park Avenue WHO ASKED WHO? Your Nov. 23, 1999, article written by Patty Wentz on "The Mormon Connection" regarding the opposition to Measure 58 is a good example of your newspaper not letting the facts get in the way of an article. I am the attorney representing the six birth mothers who have challenged Measure 58 as unconstitutional. You correctly reported that I am a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. However, contrary to what you reported, my church membership had absolutely nothing to do with my decision to oppose Measure 58. As I believe I informed Ms. Wentz shortly after the lawsuit was filed, I was not recruited by anyone to oppose Measure 58. I volunteered my time and efforts in opposition to Measure 58 before it was even passed. As an adoptive parent and one who also has worked with a number of birth mothers in connection with adoptions, I strongly believe that Measure 58 is grossly unfair to birth mothers because it breaches promises and assurances of confidentiality, privacy and anonymity that were made over the past 40 years to birth mothers when they made their difficult and life-changing decision to surrender a child for adoption. Your bias in reporting events surrounding Measure 58 and in support of the measure has become all too apparent, not only as regards the article in question but also in previous articles. Your articles only praise the measure's supporters, but accuse and speak disparagingly of its opponents. Investigative reporting has its place, but it should be fact-based and focus on both sides of an issue. Franklin Hunsaker Southwest 5th Avenue Patty Wentz responds: While Hunsaker did tell WW he volunteered his work representing the anonymous birth mothers opposing Measure 58, Bill Pierce of the National Council for Adoption also told us he did, in fact, call on Hunsaker when he began to believe that Warren Deras, the attorney who had been working against the measure, did not have the experience to handle a court challenge nor was he media-savvy enough for a high-profile campaign. Hunsaker has not responded to recent calls from WW. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Willamette Week | originally published December 22, 1999