Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About The Blue Mountain eagle. (John Day, Or.) 1972-current | View Entire Issue (July 1, 2020)
NEWS MyEagleNews.com Fourth of July cornhole, fireworks planned in Monument By Steven Mitchell Blue Mountain Eagle While the Fourth of July will look much dif- ferent this year with big gatherings and many fire- works shows being can- celed, residents will be able to celebrate the holiday in Monument. The annual festivities will be held privately along the North Fork of the John Day River at North Fork RV and Camping Park. North Fork RV and Camping owner Steve Mills said registration for cornhole is at 10 a.m, and the tournament kicks off at noon. Mills said, through donations from several ranchers and others who had been involved in the event in the past, the fire- works show at dusk will be 20% larger than last year. Mills said there have been approximately 70 people at the park in pre- vious years, but he is not sure how many people will show up this year. “I can’t say that’s going to happen in our park this year,” he said. “But you know it sounds like there’s going to be quite a few people.” Mills said it was import- ant to keep the tradition of the Fourth of July going this year. He said when events in small Eastern Oregon towns get canceled for even just one year they run the risk of not coming back the following year. “I’m not saying that this would happen on the Fourth,” he said. “But they don’t seem to come back because the towns have such a struggle with money.” Mills said he is not sure if there will be booths set up this year and that they are “playing it by ear.” He said this is the first year that he and his wife, Susan, have hosted the event so he does not want to “over-promise.” For more informa- tion, contact Mills at 541-693-3087. Wednesday, July 1, 2020 A3 Canyon City weighs in on proposed aquatic center City council will make decision in July By Rudy Diaz Blue Mountain Eagle Discussion on an aquatic center in Grant County contin- ues as residents in Canyon City talked about their thoughts on the pool and voting. During the Canyon City City Council meeting on June 23, proponents and opponents of a proposed aquatic center and taxing district shared their thoughts as the city council lis- tened to the concerns of their constituents. The proposal would create a new aquatic taxing district that would encompass Prairie City, Mt. Vernon, Canyon City, Seneca and John Day, and their rural fire districts. The district would have a permanent tax rate of 20 cents per $1,000 of a property’s assessed value for operations costs, as well as a 20-year construction bond with a rate of 71 cents per $1,000 of assessed value. Lisa Weigum, a resident in Canyon City, shared her con- cerns on a survey sent out by Canyon City. The survey about the proposed pool was sent out to 250 residents through the water and sewer bills. There were 113 (45%) sur- veys returned with 51 (45%) respondents saying yes and 62 (55%) residents saying no. Of the feedback from the survey, 109 were property owners and nine were renters. Weigum asked if the city council would base its decision on the survey. “Our concern is that we are representing our constit- uents, so the best way to do that is the people we do have access to, we can send out a questionnaire and those are the ones typically paying the bill,” said Canyon City Mayor Steve Fischer. Weigum said, if the city is going to base it on the popula- tion of the people they serve, the 250 surveys with the water and sewer bills are not an accu- rate reflection of the voting population in the town and in each household. A council member asked Weigum what the city should have done differently. Weigum said, while it was difficult to have meetings due to COVID- 19, she would have liked to have seen more town hall meetings and more oppor- tunities for people to under- stand what they are voting on instead of just a survey. She said it was not just Can- yon City’s fault and that there should have been participa- tion from the steering com- The Eagle/Rudy Diaz Mayor Steve Fischer and the Canyon City City Council listen to what members of the audience had to say about a proposed aquatic district June 23. mittee that proposed the tax- ing district. Fischer said the town hall meetings were planned, but he got a notice to cancel the meetings until further notice due to COVID-19. “I brought it to the coun- cil saying we aren’t going to be able to have those town hall meetings, but we need to have some kind of idea to have input from our constituents,” Fischer said. Fischer shared a concern that large landowners in Grant County have more at stake when it comes to the amount in taxes they would have to pay, but would not have as big of a say when it comes to voting. “Keep in mind that some- body who owns a single-wide ... that pays $30 a year in taxes... My point is is that that person has the right to vote. That person may be paying $30 a year in taxes,” Fischer said. “Now we’re talking about people who have thou- sands of acres worth millions of dollars, and they’re paying thousands of dollars a year... All I’m saying is that the peo- ple who have the most at stake is not the bulk of those that are living in poverty.” Fischer added that he received a letter from the Grant County Farm Bureau with statements from people who own large amounts of land in Grant County. “I do have somebody pay- ing $30, $40, $50 for a $2,500- worth manufactured home, and they’re gonna have just as much say,” Fischer, who works in the Grant County Assessor’s Office, said. Weigum asked if Fischer was saying that people who own property have more of a right to vote than people who don’t. Fischer said no, but those are the ones bills are sent to. “But their vote doesn’t matter anymore than if you own a trailer house and pay $10 in taxes,” Weigum said. “That vote has the same weight as someone who pays $10,000 in taxes because they own a multi-million dollar ranch. That’s what a vote is... We shouldn’t be discriminated against because we don’t own property.” Fischer said, “The thing is, your portion of payment is not going to be the (same).” Although the rates would be the same for every property owner in the proposed taxing district, the amount owed by each owner would vary based on the amount of property owned and its assessed value. Farmland and timberland is assessed differently than other properties. Land owner John Morris said he is one of the ranch- ers and farmers that would be impacted if the rural fire dis- tricts were included in the dis- trict boundaries as planned. He said it would be paying for something not needed. “I’ll admit, I raised kids here, but I don’t have any kids anymore,” Morris said. “Is it benefiting me? Not in the least.” Fischer said he was con- cerned with the lack of infor- mation provided on the pos- sibility of repairing Gleason Pool and the focus on building a new pool. He added that he does not believe that the state of Oregon would back out of plans to build a new Kam Wah Chung interpretive center — in the current pool’s location — because of the swimming pool. “Again, it boils down to the very thing I brought up at several meetings, and the only thing I heard is ‘No, we’re not moving backwards, we’re only moving forward,’” Fischer said. Fischer read the letter from the Grant County Farm Bureau, which represents local agricultural producers and other landowners in Grant County, which suggested that Canyon City follow Mt. Ver- non in the decision to vote down the resolution until a third reasonable option is con- sidered. This option is to repair Gleason Pool and update it for an extended life of five to 15 years to allow sufficient tim- ing to develop a reasonable alternative for its replace- ment in a location that benefits youth as a priority. “In either case, however, John Day secures potential economic benefits to them- selves while the external cost inherit to tourism is bore by others. Rural landowners and agricultural producers will not be immune to these neg- ative impacts,” Fischer read from the letter. “Although our board has not wrapped up our review or prepared our pub- lic position on this matter, we have reviewed sufficient back- ground material to determine that the city’s proposal does not appear to reflect the inter- est of most area residents nor is it timely.” Another concern Fischer had is the effect on the tax rate due to Mt. Vernon already vot- ing against a resolution sup- porting the pool, which would require adjustments to the tax rates or district boundaries to bring in the funding necessary to operate the pool. Sena Raschio, a property owner in Canyon City, voiced her support for the pool being on the ballot and its impor- tance for the kids in the county. “I have two children, and I can really use a pool to not only keep my kids physically active... but it is a challenge this summer to keep my kids physically active,” Raschio said. “We would want to have a pool, and we would be will- ing to pay.” Raschio added that the clo- sure of Gleason Pool this year because of COVID-19 restric- tions showed her just how important it is to have a pool and activities for her family. Fischer said he agreed about the importance of a pool in Grant County, but said the point that he is trying to make is that repairing the pool was never examined. According to the final report on the pool presented to the city of John Day, the city’s consulting team esti- mated the cost for repairs could be between $540,000 and $810,000 or more, which could extend the life of the pool another 10-15 years at most, at which point it would need to be replaced. As the discussion began to wrap up, Fischer clarified that he had voiced his opinion, but the city council as a whole will make the ultimate decision. The resolution will be brought up during the next Canyon City City Council meeting in July. S194052-1 S195887-1
