LET TERS
WHAT THE FRACK?
“Does that burger taste funny to you?”
Recently I learned that fracking chemicals
might be in the meat and produce being
distributed to a grocery store near me and
near you.
“On a North Dakota farm, fi ve cows died
after fracking began in 32 wells within three
miles from the farm,” according to Food and
Water Watch. In New Mexico, petroleum
residues were found in 54 out of 56 animals
tested. Some cows lost their tails!
Fracking occurs now in almost every
state and is quickly expanding into
California’s Central Valley, home to farms
producing much of our nation’s fruits and
vegetables. We’ve all seen clips of tap
water catching fi re. I wonder how that
water affects growing vegetables?
But the government’s protecting us
right? Wrong! Currently the FDA doesn’t
check our food system for fracking
contaminants like methane, polymers,
phthalates and glycols. The Bush-Cheney
administration exempted the fracking
industry from the Clean Water Act. Does
that make sense to you? We can’t deny
the increases in asthma, obesity, cancer
and heart disease among our friends and
family. Think there’s a relationship?
What we know for sure is that “corporate
people” are allowed to poison actual
VIEWPOINT
people for their profi ts. Why? Who gets to
decide what’s in our air and water? We the
people? Or the corporations?
Let’s call on the FDA to test for fracking
contaminants. And what the frack? Let’s
ban fracking! And tar sands oil, pipelines
and coal mining too. It’s too late to stop both
poles and glaciers from melting, but perhaps
we can stave off some other disasters?
Come to the fi rst 2014 local 350 Chapter
Meet-Up for some timely community
organizing from 7 to 9 pm Thursday, Jan.
23, at First United Methodist Church, 13th
and Olive. Bring your best thinking. We’re
ready to do something!
Deb McGee
Peaceful Valley
Subsistence Farmer
LISTEN TO TEACHERS
EW should be commended for the
Education issue Jan. 9. It was great to
hear Peter Bauer, a Bethel teacher, share
his personal experiences as a student and
a teacher in underfunded Oregon schools.
It was also inspiring to hear about Jeff
Hess and Peter Hoffmeister’s class that
integrates outdoor skills with language arts
despite a top-down, unpopular decision to
change high school schedules. And Amy
Schneider’s piece on Common Core was
excellent in that it included a parent’s voice
as well as the voice of the president of the
teacher’s union. These are voices from
people who are intimately involved in our
schools under diffi cult circumstances.
It’s time for teachers to be heard. It’s
also time for students and parents to be
listened to. For too long, politicians,
corporate big shots and “educational
reformers” have shaped the debate around
public education and have created policies
without input of the educators, students and
parents. Many of these policies have been
counterproductive and have not improved
the quality of education for our students.
EW has stepped up and offered to
provide space on a regular basis for educator
voices to be heard. Students and concerned
parents should also take advantage of this
opportunity to contribute to the issues
that affect them. “Reclaiming Public
Education” should be a regular feature of
this publication. It will complement the
series of public forums on education, by the
same name, sponsored by the Community
Alliance for Public Education (CAPE).
Pete Mandrapa
Eugene
CHECK YOUR FACTS
I found interest in a Dec. 5 article by
Camilla Mortensen discussing the merits
of Sen. Ron Wyden’s forest bill. The article
mostly focused on one particular section of
the forest bill that may authorize the sale
or exchange of suitable lands between the
BLM and private or state entities, but only
if the (Interior) secretary determined it was
in the public interest to do so. There was
a clear insinuation this was just another
attempt by industry to acquire access to
old-growth forests.
Andy Stahl was quoted [in the article] as
saying that “timber interests such as Seneca
whose lands border the O&C forests would
again stand to benefi t from an O&C land
exchange and would ‘get old growth under
the guise of consolidating lands.’” For
the record, Seneca does not consume old-
growth timber in any of its manufacturing
facilities, and to imply such is just a
continuation of the “fear-based” messaging
by environmental organizations as they
know they can’t stand behind the truth.
In the future, please check your facts.
Todd A. Payne
General Manager
Seneca Sawmill Company
MORAL CONCERN
In regards to Robert England’s letter
Jan. 9 [“Moral Obligation,” concerning
Civic Stadium], I say “Hear, hear!”
Beverley Ann Mowery
Eugene
BY JIM WATSON
Intense Opposition Coming
FRED MEYER UNDERESTIMATES EUGENE
T
he fate of Civic Stadium is unlikely to be decided
in 2014. Yes, the members of the 4J School Board
are committed to “disposing” of the structure
as soon as they possibly can — they consider it
a distraction from their mission. But, whether
they choose to accept the offer of Kroger (Fred
Meyer), the Y or the city of Eugene, it will almost certainly
be a year or more before we know how the site will be used.
The reasons differ for each of the bidders.
Kroger — It’s hard to imagine why the 4J Board
would even consider the Fred Meyer offer. It doesn’t
take a crystal ball to see that 4J will continue to own
the stadium for years while developer Peter Powell tries
to wear down city planners to change zoning and get
permits approved. Certainly the board cannot consider
accepting what Kroger considers a “plan.” Ask, for
example, what will be on the site with the big box and
Powell just says they are listening to the community —
a dubious assertion given the overwhelming percentage
of the community that says, “No Fred Meyer!”
Powell’s strategy on other projects has been to wait
out opposition. But he proved how he underestimates
Eugene’s opposition to demolishing the stadium for a
Fred Meyer when he recently told The Register-Guard
“We are not expecting appeals” from project opponents.
He ought to be aware that the opposition will be intense
and the appeals many, leaving the Eugene School District
with ownership of the structure for all the years Powell
is prepared to wait. Does 4J really want to continue
being blamed for letting Civic Stadium deteriorate and
eventually succumb to “demolition by 4J’s neglect”?
4
J a n u a r y 16 , 2 014 • e u g e n e w e e k l y . c o m
The Y — While the YMCA does an excellent job of
teaching us how to swim and stay in shape, I wouldn’t
want to count on it to teach us logic. The Y uses two
premises that we can all agree on to reach a head-
scratching conclusion:
A) The Y is a valuable community asset and B) the
Y needs a new building, therefore Civic Stadium must
be demolished.
Huh? Not only are there multiple locations for a new
Y, there is even room for it on the site with a renovated
stadium. The Y’s excuse for resisting co-location —
parking — is a problem with solutions, not an end-
of-story roadblock. It is, in fact, a problem it will
face anyway with the “dance partner” of the moment,
yet another housing development. The Y’s plan for
“honoring” the history of Civic Stadium is, frankly,
insulting, and, with a shaky fi nancing plan dependent
on housing, the site would, again, likely remain the
responsibility of 4J well into the future.
The city — If Eugene’s bid is accepted, 4J will get
its revenue right away and no longer have the burden of
caring for Civic. What happens to the historic structure
then will be up to the city and any partners it brings on
board. These partners could include Friends of Civic
Stadium (FoCS) and other supporters of refurbishing and
repurposing Civic for soccer, other fi eld sports and events.
Ultimately Civic must become a self-sustaining operation,
spruced up, back in use and treasured by the community.
We are confi dent that will happen if Civic is given the
chance. It is a low-risk, high-reward proposition. This is
a one-of-a-kind building that once gone is gone forever.
There is nothing easy about getting the city’s bid
considered since the Eugene City Council has only given
supporters 60 days to raise a $5.5 million maintenance
and rehabilitation guarantee. It is a heavy lift that will
require the generosity and community spirit of some
deep-pocketed individuals, but we are hopeful. And,
if it takes longer than 60 days, we think the council
will see the promise of Civic to the community and be
fl exible in the timeline, and include in the defi nition of
“guarantee” long-term commitments and offers of in-
kind materials and labor.
I recently saw a documentary about how Seattle
benefi ted from the business leaders who made the
vision of the 1962 World’s Fair a reality. Three points
in the fi lm are worth considering: 1) “Public money
made it possible; private money made it spectacular,”
2) lasting positive effects of the fair resulted when
Seattle “consciously and intentionally created a space
for all people; a place that creates community,” and 3)
“Seattle rose above petty parochial concerns to create a
lasting legacy.”
Civic supporters are eager to accept the challenge of
helping the city prove that the stadium will be the kind
of legacy the 1962 fair gave Seattle and to make Civic
even more of a community asset than it used to be: an
affordable, family-friendly, diverse gathering place
open to all. We ask 4J and the city: Do we really want to
throw away such an opportunity? Giving Civic Stadium
a chance is the right — and smart — thing to do.
Jim Watson is secretary of the Friends of Civic Stadium Board of Directors.