A8 The BulleTin • Sunday, May 23, 2021
EDITORIALS & OPINIONS
AN INDEPENDENT NEWSPAPER
Heidi Wright
Gerry O’Brien
Richard Coe
Publisher
Editor
Editorial Page Editor
How does Bend
better serve
the homeless?
V
oters elect Bend city councilors to look after their interests
and the city’s. Councilors aren’t elected to rubber stamp
what the Bend Chamber of Commerce wants.
On Wednesday, something hap-
pened that could have made people
wonder.
Preston Callicott, who serves on
the board of the Bend Chamber,
spoke before councilors and urged
them not to buy the Rainbow Motel
on Franklin Avenue in downtown
for a homeless shelter. Katy Brooks,
president and CEO of the Bend
Chamber, wrote a letter to coun-
cilors making a similar argument.
Then, later in Wednesday’s council
meeting, councilors terminated the
city’s purchase and sale agreement
for the Rainbow.
Just like that the Rainbow deal
was dead. Councilors are continuing
to look at Bend Value Inn, which is
also downtown.
Did councilors do what the cham-
ber wanted? Yes.
Did councilors do it because the
chamber said so? No.
Is the chamber against housing
homeless downtown? No on that
one, too.
Will one hotel fill the need? No.
Should the business commu-
nity do more to ensure Bend gets a
homeless shelter and services down-
town? We’ll let you answer that one.
The city has been in a race to find
a location for a hotel to transform
into a homeless shelter. The options
available now for housing the home-
less in Bend are inadequate. Only a
few months ago David Savory died
on the street in Bend. He couldn’t get
shelter. The state has made available
competitive grant money that Bend
could use to help buy a hotel for the
homeless. Unfortunately, the city
may be out of the running. It could
still use funding from the federal
American Rescue Plan.
The city has looked at several lo-
cations. Exactly what happens in
those deals and why they may fall
apart is not made public. Real estate
negotiations are one of the things
that under Oregon law governments
can conduct behind closed doors. It
protects public money.
If councilors had to plan their
negotiations in the open, the seller
could know how much to jack up
the price.
The secrecy does create a prob-
lem. The public doesn’t get much
explanation of what is going on.
Councilors are also not supposed to
talk about what happens in execu-
tive session. In fact, when we asked
councilors to explain their positions
on Rainbow, city staff sent out an
email to councilors reminding them
they weren’t supposed to talk about
what happens in executive session.
Well, councilors didn’t recount
for us what happened in executive
session. Councilors Barb Campbell,
Anthony Broadman, Melanie Kebler
and Mayor Sally Russell did get back
to us. The Rainbow is in what Bend
calls its central district. That area is
ripe for redevelopment. The city is
promoting it. Bend is growing. More
intense development downtown is
better than more intense develop-
ment in neighborhoods, right? Sev-
eral projects are being worked on in
that very area. They could kick off
the redevelopment. That would be
good for the city.
If you know Campbell at all, you
know she is not one to sit meekly by
and do the bidding of developers.
Campbell wrote us in an email that
the developers she spoke with con-
vinced her that transitional housing
at the Rainbow location would jeop-
ardize those redevelopment plans.
Broadman, Kebler and Russell
pointed out the money issue. With
limited money to buy a hotel, coun-
cilors faced a choice: the Rainbow,
the Bend Value Inn, which is also
downtown or both. Councilors
chose for now to continue to pur-
sue the Bend Value Inn. Broadman
wrote the “Bend Value Inn is less
expensive than the Rainbow Mo-
tel....The Chamber’s argument was
reasonable, but my decision wasn’t
based on their points or all of the
input we had about the potential
impact of this project in the Bend
Central District.” Although we don’t
have other councilors on record, we
have every reason to believe their
reasoning is similar.
As for the Bend Chamber, it does
believe that more must be done to
serve the homeless in Bend. Brooks,
the chamber’s CEO and president,
told us the chamber is very support-
ive of siting a shelter in Bend’s down-
town. Good.
When we were talking to people
about this council decision, some-
thing struck us. It was from Travis
Davis, a Bend businessman who
serves on the Bend Economic Devel-
opment Advisory Board or BEDAB.
That’s a city committee to give input
to the city from the business com-
munity. He said in Bend both the
chamber and BEDAB do try to serve
as intermediaries. They do try to
balance broader community needs
and the narrower interests of busi-
nesses. We believe that. So then how
else will the business community
step up to ensure a homeless shel-
ter in Bend’s downtown becomes a
reality?
There’s a big affordable housing
project near Bend’s parking garage,
as Mayor Russell reminded us. Do
you know where it is? If Bend can
do that so well, can it also provide
shelter and services for the commu-
nity’s neediest where rents are sure
to soar? That would have a special
poetry.
Editorials reflect the views of The Bulletin’s editorial board, Publisher Heidi Wright, Editor
Gerry O’Brien and Editorial Page Editor Richard Coe. They are written by Richard Coe.
My Nickel’s Worth
Protect nurses
As COVID-19 hospitalizations con-
tinue, our nurses are still facing signif-
icant staffing challenges. More than
a year into Oregon’s public health
emergency, we assumed that hospitals
would be using nurse-approved emer-
gency staffing plans. Unfortunately,
this has not been the case for many
Oregon hospitals.
Normally, hospital administrators
are required by law to collaborate with
frontline nurses to determine safe
staffing plans for our patients. Cur-
rently, this requirement is suspended
during states of emergency such as
COVID-19. The advocating voice of
your nurse is being silenced.
The emergency continues, and
nurses are still asking, “Will I be able
to keep my patients safe during my
shift? Will I need to work 12 hours
without a break because no one can
cover me? Will I be asked to take
more patients than is safe?”
We should never have to ask our-
selves these questions. During an
emergency, safe hospital staffing is
more important than ever. Hospital
administrators have worked incredi-
bly hard to provide adequate facilities
and resources to care for Oregonians
during this pandemic. However, one
major lesson we learned is that we
MUST work together during emer-
gencies to create collaborative, flexible
and safe staffing plans. This cannot
be disregarded in the name of “emer-
gency”.
Oregon House Bill 3016 will close
the loophole in our current law by
allowing frontline nurses to have a
say in staffing levels during an emer-
gency. By passing smart measures like
House Bill 3016 now, Oregon will be
better prepared for the next crisis. I
encourage Sen. Knopp and all Orego-
nians to support House Bill 3016 to
ensure that safe staffing continues for
patients and nurses especially during
emergencies.
— Karla Toms is a nurse in Bend.
Papers, please
“Show me your papers.” What
does this bring to mind? Maybe Nazi
Germany? Wherever I go, I would
have “show my papers.” Absolutely
not. I will not be shamed into getting
“the” vaccine by being forced to wear
a mask until I do, which I won’t, I
would be indefinitely wearing a mask?
Not going to happen. I will not par-
ticipate ... period. Enough is enough.
If this nation wasn’t divided enough,
this CDC guideline has made it worse.
Putting the onus on store employees
to be the mask and vaccine police is
absurd and very socialistic. Venezu-
ela, here we come. This is government
overreach on steroids.
Look at Texas, one of many states
that got rid of excess restrictions
months ago, and their numbers are
going way down.
— Dale McCray, Bend
Should Oregon have
a vaccine passport?
If we are going to seriously enter-
tain this question, I have a few others.
Should Oregon issue a “clean pass-
port” to those vaccinated against influ-
enza as well? What about people with
AIDS? Maybe their passports should
be a different color for easy identifica-
tion? They could be prevented from
entering social proximity to others,
from entering restaurants, from travel-
ing by plane or enjoying similar basic
liberties. I certainly hope at least a few
of my fellow Oregonians find these
suggestions as offensive as I find the
suggestion of a vaccine passport.
If the new rule is to save “just one
life,” then there is no end to which we
can justify giving up the basic liber-
ties of others for the feeling of having
done something for the greater good.
Is it right that the “we” who agree with
vaccine passports enforce their will
upon the “them” that disagree, value
their privacy and would rather live
their lives unmolested by state bu-
reaucrats and nosy self-righteous fel-
low citizens who lack basic respect for
their individual sovereignty? Would it
not be effective and efficient to set up
mandatory electronic checks during
credit transactions to purchase food
and other staple items so that such
people could be continually identified
and properly chastised and ostracized,
relegated to digital leper colonies? I am
sure identification and expulsion from
a society of those who conform to state
policies has never proven a recipe for
evil in humanity’s sordid history.
And what about the concern for the
risk non-vaccinated people pose to
the vaccinated? Why wait for database
checks and risk accidental infection
when people could simply be required
to wear a plainly visible yellow badge
or other such garment that would
identify them as a hazard to others, a
socially undesirable person.
Clearly, we would want such an
item to be visible at a distance and ef-
fective at preventing any accidental
transmission of deadly intransigence
to state authorities — I’d recommend
a mask. That seems perfectly reason-
able does it not?
Of course, let us not complicate
our thought processes by asking what
good is a vaccine if it remains true
that the unvaccinated continue to
pose such a risk to those who are vac-
cinated that they must themselves be
vaccinated or face penalties?
Should “we” have mask laws or vac-
cine passports? No.
— Ethan Nelson, Bend
Letters policy
Guest columns
How to submit
We welcome your letters. Letters should
be limited to one issue, contain no more
than 250 words and include the writer’s
signature, phone number and address
for verification. We edit letters for brevity,
grammar, taste and legal reasons. We re-
ject poetry, personal attacks, form letters,
letters submitted elsewhere and those
appropriate for other sections of The Bul-
letin. Writers are limited to one letter or
guest column every 30 days.
Your submissions should be between
550 and 650 words; they must be signed;
and they must include the writer’s phone
number and address for verification. We
edit submissions for brevity, grammar,
taste and legal reasons. We reject those
submitted elsewhere. Locally submitted
columns alternate with national colum-
nists and commentaries. Writers are lim-
ited to one letter or guest column every
30 days.
Please address your submission to either
My Nickel’s Worth or Guest Column and
mail, fax or email it to The Bulletin. Email
submissions are preferred.
Email: letters@bendbulletin.com
Write: My Nickel’s Worth/Guest Column
P.O. Box 6020
Bend, OR 97708
Fax:
541-385-5804
What have we become and what are we afraid of?
W
BY WILLIAM BARRON
e have witnessed and ex-
perienced a lot in the last
year, as individuals and as a
country.
However, the capitulation and im-
plosion of the Republican Party may
be the most shocking. The Grand
Old Party, which once championed
global influence based on principles
and global trade, has become a Group
of Patsies wallowing in self-delusion,
fearful of shining the light of truth,
and idolatry.
The party, in my lifetime, faced
down the tyranny of Soviet Russia but
now embraces its own form of tyr-
anny, race-based caste system and iso-
lation. It is a party that advocates hid-
ing behind walls rather than tearing
walls down.
The party, which once proudly ad-
vocated for fact-based decision mak-
ing, is now advocating hiding from
the investigation of the Jan. 6 insur-
rection. Burying their collective head
in the sand trying to make believe it
did not happen. That a mob, flying
the flags of a corrupt defeated dicta-
torship, the flag of racism and slavery,
and those of idol worship, did not at-
tack the Capitol, did not assault Cap-
itol Police and the foundations of our
Constitution.
Nope, didn’t happen. It is fake news
and was a group of peaceful, law-abid-
ing citizens exercising their freedom
of speech and having a “tour of the
Capitol.” Denial does not mean it did
not happen. Denial does mean it will
happen again. How many members
of Congress will stand up for the Con-
GUEST COLUMN
stitution and this country and try to
determine what happened on the days
before and after Jan. 6.
And how many will prove they are
panderers and patsies only vying for
votes from those who are too afraid to
seek truth?
What are we afraid of? As we con-
sciously and unconsciously prac-
tice our unique form of race-based
caste system. What are we afraid of?
Are we afraid of losing some of our
race-based privileges? Are we afraid
of equal rights, equal treatment and
equal access? Are we afraid, that on
any given level playing field, we can
no longer compete? That maybe, just
maybe there are those who are better
who have never had a chance to show
just how good they are? If we con-
sider ourselves a team, TEAM USA is
failing. It is failing to play the best the
players or even to let them try out for
the team. We must look forward and
recognize everyone has more talents
and more to offer. Exclusion based on
race, gender, creed, orientation, na-
tionality, education or anything else
succeeds in maintaining a false-based
caste system and inhibits all of us
from moving forward toward greater
goals. It succeeds in allowing those
who strive to see us fail drive wedges
of misinformation into the fabric of
our nation.
The principles of fiscal discipline,
personal responsibility and account-
ability, global leadership and trade,
and social compassion have been cast
aside. Cast aside for denial, scapegoat-
ing, isolation and radical racial divide.
The Republican Party I was a part
of for more than half a century has
been displaced by a cult, worshiping a
demigod in the hopes of maintaining
a failing direction and whose leaders
care more about being reelected than
taking a stand for the principles of the
country.
The party was bigger than one
person and now is as small, and as
shallow, as one. The party, whose
leaders once stood in defiance of
tyrants and dictators now embrace
them rather than standing for
freedom, truth and democracy. The
idea of “truth will set you free” can
only come to reality if we actually seek
the truth. #NeverFeartheDream
e e
William Barron lives in Bend.