Letters to the Editor for April 20

The planning commission was left with a difficult decision that ended up being based almost entirely on “data” provided by Verizon. All information provided regarding “gaps in cell coverage” was taken at face value with no independent, unbiased source of alternative solutions. The Verizon representatives from Seattle and Spokane gave a sloppy presentation full of dubious generalizations and vague “we don’t know” and “based on our industry analysis” remarks. No documentation was presented regarding attempts by Verizon to co-locate their service on an existing tower or outside the valley floor. The commission appeared to ease their conscience by grasping on the vague Verizon promise of “concealment technology,” while simultaneously arguing for the option of four companies utilizing the proposed tower. (We Hood River folks know what a real tree is supposed to look like). Interesting word — “concealment.”

The real concealment was the hidden motives of the cell tower industry that would much prefer to locate this tower in a convenient location (for them) rather than in a more remote area. It seems to me that the role of the planning commission is primarily to plan appropriate development that is in line with a larger vision of livability and esthetics, not just apply legal definitions and rules. The Verizon representative stated clearly that Verizon had an obligation to prove that a cell tower location has no less intrusive alterative site. I saw no documentation that clearly provides this due diligence, especially regarding co-location and sites above the valley floor. Accepting Verizon’s own “data” as grounds for making a planning decision is like accepting the tobacco industry “data” to plan for reasonable non-smoking ordinances in our county. Let’s use this opportunity to develop reasonable aesthetically beautiful decisions for any future cell tower construction in our valley.

Patrick Rawson

Hood River

Editor’s note: This letter refers to a Planning Commission hearing last Wednesday in which the commission approved a cell tower near Windmaster Corner. The Board of Commissioners on Monday held a separate cell tower hearing, which set in place general rules for the structures’ placement and character in an ordinance.

Micromanaged

I leave it to the opponents to prove the following statements wrong.

Nestlé proposes to build a new, larger water reservoir for Cascade Locks, to update the water main system, place new hydrants along the line, and repair the road that would be torn up in the process. Is this correct or a fallacy?

They would also add a waterline that feeds the Oxbow National Fish hatchery.

This is all being opposed by an organization that that simply states “Stop Using Water to Make a Profit.”

How does this relate to our beer and wine industry (also orchards)? Beer is composed of around 90 percent water. Does this include them? How about water sports, which are used to make a profit.

This is not a sale of the resources, it is a rental. Implementation will practically double the property tax revenue of Cascade Locks as well as increasing the economy of the city.

The unused water is not saved. It goes into the Columbia and is forwarded to the ocean. It is not available to the Hood River Valley.

I do not think that this should be a county problem. I think that we should allow Cascade Locks to make their own decision. If we persist with this micro-management, where does it stop? Should Hood River (city) have its every decision voted on by the county?

Much of this information has been obtained from an article posted by “Hayword.” I assume that this is correct unless proven false.

Leonard Hickman

Hood River

Caution appreciated

When reading through the Panorama: Reflections section of the paper, I was pleased to see the photo and caption asking drivers to be considerate of the farm related vehicles that will be on the roads during Blossom weekend and beyond. As a farmer, I appreciate the extra words of caution. I hope everybody enjoys the beautiful scenery that the valley’s farms provide.

Lisa Perry

Parkdale

‘Honored’

Earlier this month, I had the honor of supporting a district speech tournament at Hood River Valley High School as a speech and debate judge. What a good time it was, to be around such impressive student speakers! I felt surrounded by great brainpower, poise, creativity, interpretive and communication skills. Congratulations to the many local students who won in their events and qualified as delegates or alternates to the state tournament. Kudos to coach DeLona Campos-Davis and the other faculty and volunteers who helped make it all possible.

While I walked from classroom to classroom that day, I also got the benefit of seeing the wonderful student artwork displayed in the halls. Sophisticated, beautiful, provocative stuff. Thanks are due to those young artists, too, and to the teachers who offer tools and examples to translate ideas and feelings into visible work.

At 66, I get a boost of optimism whenever I can experience close-up the talents and contributions of younger people to our society.

Tina Castañares

Odell

‘Why not?’

Have you ever wondered why the Washington Deceivers will do their utmost to make the congressional/senatorial hill unclimbable for anyone on the outside wishing to change things for the better on the inside? I look at it this way: Advantageous change for modern America happens elsewhere in our country … why not in the nation’s capital?

Bill Davis

Hood River

Supports 14-55

I wish every voter in our County could have been at the Cascade Locks City Council meeting I attended recently to consider the Water Protection Measure 14-55 that would prohibit bottled water exports. It would have made clear that despite the small vocal group of Nestlé supporters, many, if not most people in Cascade Locks, do not actually want Nestlé or anyone to have any control of our water supply.

The number of Cascade Locks residents and tribal members supporting 14-55 and opposing Nestlé’s bottled water grab hugely outnumbered Nestlé supporters. Despite lots of awareness about the meeting, Nestlé could only muster three people to speak in support of the project, while more than 20 Cascade Locks voters and tribal members testified against it.

Most of the Cascade Locks City Council and the Port of Cascade Locks jumped on board with Nestlé a long time ago, but when the majority of council speaks up for Nestlé, it was obvious at this meeting that they are not speaking for the majority of people who live in Cascade Locks.

As a proud resident of my town, I’m voting yes on 14-55 and encourage everyone in Hood River County to do the same.

Joseph Shelley

Cascade Locks

Ask ‘larger questions’

Before you determine whether you’re for or against the local water measure, examine some larger questions.

In a world dominated by corporate greed and profit, often at the expense of the people and our environment, we must take the responsibility of determining if a corporation is one that acts responsibly. Is it a corporation engaged in sustainable practices, one good for our community in a broader sense than jobs? Are they a corporation you’d like to partner with?

Is the very concept of putting water in plastic bottles that fill our landfills and oceans with non-degradable garbage in general something you support? Eighty percent of water bottles bought in the United States don’t get recycled. Instead, they end up in the landfill. We use 17 million barrels of oil each year to produce all of those plastic water bottles.

Aside from the environmental impacts of the plastic waste, there are further impacts caused by the delivery of all this plastic water. We are using 40,000 18-wheeler trucks to deliver water every week! I personally prefer using a BPA free refillable water bottle that’s filled with tap water. It’s actually far healthier than bottled water. What is the real cost of a bottle of water when you consider the overall impacts of this unnecessary business?

Is privatization of water something you support? All across America, companies are attempting to take public water for profit. The average cost of one bottle of water is $1.45. If tap water cost the same per gallon as the cheapest bottled water, the total cost of monthly household water bills would be $9,000 per month!

If you consider the above factors, I think it will make your decision on this measure quite simple. You won’t even have to get involved in all the issues of whether it will harm riparian habitat, hatchery and fish issues, water supply, drought, what’s best for Cascade Locks, etc. My decision was made years ago on this matter. I don’t support Nestlé, the concept of bottled water, hatchery fish rearing, or privatization of public resources.

Greg Shepherd,

environmental engineer

Hood River

‘Absolute no’

I will vote no on Ballot Measure 14-55 for the following reasons:

1) When I read the measure as written, I find that 14-55 is not about water conservation. If it were, it would address water utilization by all entities, both public and private, with an eye to cutbacks in a drought and place feasible future limits on water utilization by the burgeoning beer, wine, juice and cider businesses in the valley. If it really is about conservation, take it off the ballot and bring it back when it is complete.

2) I note the measure is an amendment to the Hood River County Charter. A water conservation plan should not be placed in an unchangeable document. It will need to be modified as conditions change over the years. Cascade Locks needs local control to work out the best contract to protect their own and our county interest. The Water Alliance should volunteer their expertise to Cascade Locks to make it work rather than hoping for endless litigation paid for by my tax dollars.

3) I believe 14-55 sets ridiculously low limits on the amount of water to be bottled each day, the equivalent of running a single outside tap for three and a half hours. Bottling this amount for 365 days would produce about the same volume of water that pFriem puts out in beer annually. Why stringent regulations on water bottling but none on water based products as well such as wine, beer, cider and juice?

Finally, I note Water Alliance’s home page statement about allowing one global corporation to come into the county to take our water as setting a precedent. Apparently this group either ignores, or gives the old “wink-wink” to the fact that a giant user of Hood River water is Full Sail, which was sold to Encore Consumer Capitol, an international specialty finance company with operations in 14 countries, on March 9, 2015. This corporation can sell Full Sail to Anheuser-Busch, Nestlé or anyone else. So much for keeping out global corporations.

I stand with Cascade Locks on this matter: Vote no on Measure 14-55.

Richard McBee

Hood River