Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (July 23, 1996)
editorials, letters, commentary and perspective n \ Should cigarettes be taxed 30 cents a pack to pay for low-income health care in Oregon? Let us know. EDITORIAL Banning dogs won’t attract long-term renters CONTACT US What do you think? Write us a letter expressing your opinion or E-mail us at ode@oregon.uore gon.edu Letters to the editor must be limited to no more than 250 words, legible, signed and the iden tification of the writer must be verified when the letter is submitted. The Emerald reserves the right to edit any letter for length or style. ■ OUR OPINION: If revitalization of the University area is the goal, the city’s proposal has missed the point r | ''he city of Eugene has proposed a JL_ between Kincaid and Patterson Streets. According to city officials quot ed in last Tuesday’s Emerald, this legis lation would revitalize the area by attracting home owners and long-term renters. The goal is also to ease conges tion in the busy three-block area. This proposal has several problems, and they stem from the fact that a ban on dogs and skateboards simply does not address the real issue. City officials have said that the goal is to improve liv ing conditions in the area. In order to do that, officials say it is necessary to have renters stay in the area longer than the typical nine-months. Of the 5,500 peo ple living in the West University dis trict, approximately 97 percent are renters. How is a ban on dogs and skateboard ers on a three-block stretch of one street going to keep renters around longer? The answer is: it won’t. The reason renters typically stay only nine months is because this is a univer sity district. A lot of students only live here nine months out of the year and go home for the summer. If the city and the University truly want to revitalize the East 13th Avenue area, they should look at other ways that will actually address the issue. Ordinances should be established and enforced that would make landlords more accountable for the condition of their property. Additionally, the city could make a number of physical improvements to solve the congestion problem. To begin with, parking could be eliminated between Alder and Kin caid Streets, sidewalks could be made wider, more trees could be planted and more room made for bike racks. These improvements would immediately alle viate congestion for bike riders and law banning dogs and skate boarders on East 13th Avenue &ee...E\jer since, days were. prohibited on I3+**, +hinjs unproved ■--—i t 7 A/)» 1 pedestrians. Making these changes will make it easier to attract a wider variety of busi nesses to the district - something beyond the bagels and coffee that cur rently reign over East 13th Avenue. A first-run movie theatre and clothing stores would be a great start. The goal should be to create a place where everyone can be comfortable. The city needs to stop being short-sighted and look for real solutions to develop ment issues. Banning dogs and skate boards is equivalent to putting a Band-Aid on a finger when it’s the leg that is broken. This editorial represents the opinion of the Emerald editorial board. HISTORICAL March 2,1995 the City of Eugene passed an ordinance making aggressive panhandling illegal. The ordinance was passed in response to several complaints from community members and business owners. August 5,1996 the city will hold a public hearing to discuss whether or not to ban dogs and skateboarders in the West University district. A proposed ordinance seeks to improve living conditions by banning dogs and» skateboarders on East 13th Avenue between Kincaid and Patterson streets. August 7,the city will decide on the ordinance. The Oregon Oally Emerald Is published daily Monday through Friday during the school year and Tuesday and Thursday during the summer by the Oregon Dally Emerald Publishing Co. Inc., at the University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon A member of the Associated Press, the Emerald operates independently of the University with offices at Suite 300 of the Erb Memorial Union. Unsigned editorials representJhe opinion ol the Emerald editor ial board; signed columns represent the opinion of the columnist. Letters to the editor must be limited to no more than 250 words, legible, signed and the Identification of the writer must be verified when the letter is submitted. The Emerald reserves the right to edit any letter for length or style. The Emerald is private property. The unlawful removal or use of papers Is prosecutable by law. Editor-In-Chief: Steven Asbury Associate Editors: Andrea DeYoung, Kristin Bailey Editorial Editor Tiffany Smith Sports Editor Mark McTyre Copy Editor Tracy Picha Photography Editor Andrew Brackensick On-Line Director Nicholas Stlffler General Manager Judy Riedl Advertising: Becky Merchant, director. Anne Amador, Lee Yen Beh, Nitdd Harper. Anne Miller, Trina Shanaman, Rose Soil Production: Michele Ross, manager Ingrid White, coordinator Laura Daniel Business: Kathy Carbone, supervisor. Judy Connolly Distribution: John Long Classified: Tara Gaultney, manager Newsroom.(541)346-5511 Display Advertising.(541) 346-3712 Business Office.(541) 346-5512 Classified Advertising.(541) 346-4343 LETTERS TO THE EDITOR Early targets How is banning skateboards on East 13th going to solve the problems of “falling down landscaping and other residential maintenance?” If 97 percent of the people living in the West University neighbor hood are rental tenants that would seem to imply that the majority of buildings in the neighborhood are rental properties. If this is so, shouldn’t landscaping and mainte nance be the responsibility of the buildings owner or the landlord in charge of the building? I don’t recall ever having signed a lease or rental agreement that held me responsible for landscaping or the mainte nance of the exterior of the building. Ten ants are generally only held responsible for maintenance to the interior of the apart ment or house that they are renting. Furthermore any interior damage that the tenant inflicts on the rental property is not visible to the general public and therefore shouldn’t negatively affect the quality of life in the neighborhood. As for Rosie Pryor’s assertion that a “densely populated area makes for a shab by looking area” I would ask what alterna tives she or the City Council would suggest. Perhaps they feel more University students should move to the suburbs and commute by car. Maybe the University will split the profit it makes from selling more parking permits than there are park ing places with the City Council. I would argue that the West University neighborhood is a “shabby looking area” because landlords and rental property owners do the bare minimum in landscap ing and maintenance to keep their profits as high as possible. Skaters and dog own ers are easy targets for the Council but the ban will probably do little to improve the livability of the neighborhood. The true problem lies with the rental property own ers, but their economic clout makes it unlikely that the City Council will chal lenge them. Scott Andrew Armstrong Student, French Which is the justice? Regarding your story on the Warner Creek activists (6-25), I found the com ments of Patti Rogers of the U.S. Forest Service very interesting. In the article she states, “Our intent is to prosecute the peo ple up there to (the] full extent possible for the damage that has been done and that the taxpayers will have to pay for to repair.” Grammar aside, her statement is admirable. I only hope that she will be just as vigilant towards the Timber Corpora tions as she is with regard to the amassed citizenry which is the object of her threat. This, however, would seem unlikely. The U.S. Forest Service has yet to make a profit on any of its salvage timber sales, when all costs are factored in. And when the government operates a program at a loss, taxpayers make up the difference. I would find it heartening if Ms. Rogers would enforce the same stringent penalties on the logging corporations that she savors directing toward the private citizens. And, if so, would this include the great financial losses from the past winter storms? Publi cized studies showed over 70 percent of damaging landslides occurred below recent clearcuts, thus exacerbating the environmental destruction and causing an influx of taxpayer dollars in the form of FEMA assistance. Here, the taxpayers foot the bill for repairing damage to their own public property (roadways, etc.) caused by private corporations purchasing other pub lic property at below market value in order to destroy it, and Ms. Rogers wants to pros ecute those doing their best to prevent identical future taxpayer liability. As Shakespeare asked, “Which is the justice, which is the thief?" Steven L. Baird Eugene
