Page 2
The INDEPENDENT, October 15, 2009
The
INDEPENDENT
Published on the first and third Thursdays of each month by
The Independent, LLC, 725 Bridge St., Vernonia, OR 97064.
Phone/Fax: 503-429-9410.
Publisher Clark McGaugh, clark@the-independent.net
Editor Rebecca McGaugh, rebecca@the-independent.net
Mentor Noni Andersen
Printed on recycled paper with vegetable based dyes
Opinion
On Bond Measure 5-197
Know how you’ll vote on 5-197? That’s the $13 mil-
lion bond measure (see related story page 1) for Ver-
nonia’s new school project. We have reservations
about where the other $24 million needed to build new
schools will come from; our problems with past deci-
sions made at the schools, such as siting the middle
school in the flood zone and selling the only school that
wasn’t in the flood zone (Lincoln Grade School) and
our concern for the citizens of this district, including us,
who have been hard hit by this economy. In spite of all
that, we have decided to vote yes. The cost to us per-
sonally will be under $15 per month, how can we say
no to something that will cost less than our coffee bill?
We don’t like to gamble, but we hope this one pays off.
New policy at city council?
During the “Topics from the Floor” portion of Vernon-
ia City Council meetings, council will call on citizens
and allow them to speak for up to five minutes. But
don’t voice concerns about how city employees per-
form their jobs. If you do, some members of the coun-
cil will interrupt you, talking and even shouting over
each other to say things like, “It’s against the law to let
you talk,” or “Take it to a lawyer.” They will also threat-
en to have you removed from council chambers for try-
ing to speak. The council’s censorship isn’t just for
“personnel” reasons, either. You can’t speak about
council’s decision not to let somebody be heard, either.
If you do, after being given the floor (recognized to
speak) it will be taken from you by Councilor Kevin (the
Enforcer) Hudson. That was what happened at the Oc-
tober 5 council meeting. Lest all council members be
painted with the same brush, we must add that Coun-
cilor Randy Parrow wasn’t present at the meeting and
we didn’t hear Councilor Brett Costley chime in.
We have always told people to take their concerns to
council meetings, become involved with their city gov-
ernment and have their voices heard. Vernonia has be-
come the exception. Unfortunately, Vernonia’s city
council lacks the common sense to just let someone
speak, without interrupting or feeling they have to cen-
sor or respond to the topic. Oh, yes, and Madam May-
or – use your gavel appropriately to restore order
amongst your fellow councilors and/or the audience.
The long and the short of it is, it really doesn’t matter
what a citizen says during their time, the appropriate
response from council is to listen (without grimacing or
smirking), then say, “Thank you.” Try it.
Guest Opinion
by Alice Vachss, JD
Years ago I was chief of the Special Victims
Bureau for the Queens County (New York City)
District Attorney’s Office. We investigated and
prosecuted what a community member once de-
scribed as “the bully crimes’ – sexual assault,
domestic violence, and crimes against children
and the elderly. It was an accurate term. If I had
to name one trait common to virtually all the de-
fendants we prosecuted, it would be bullying. Al-
most as soon as I moved to the Oregon coast, I
recognized a familiar enemy.
A few weeks earlier, a jury had acquitted a
Newport police officer of domestic violence
charges, dividing the town into polar opposite
camps. Although I was later to become involved
professionally on behalf of the accuser in a civil
(not criminal) matter, this Viewpoint contains
only my personal observations of those times
and their effect on our community.
The acquitted officer had worked for the Tole-
do Police Department before transferring to
Newport. Both police forces sided squarely with
the officer. They had been strident witnesses for
him at his jury trial and later attended court pro-
ceedings in a show of force when he was subse-
quently accused of violating a temporary re-
straining order. A few months later, the Interna-
tional Association of Chiefs of Police issued a
model policy for what it calls “officer-involved do-
mestic violence.” It recognized the conflicting
loyalties inevitable when accusations are leveled
against a fellow officer, and crafted strategies for
departmental fairness and impartiality. Toledo
and Newport police were perfect examples of
what not to do in such cases. In fact, they sim-
mered with resentment toward a community that
had dared to require such standards of them.
The opposition was equally vehement and un-
reasoned. Few of those objecting to an unjust
verdict had attended the trial, or knew anything
about the evidence. They blamed all law en-
forcement, ignoring the superb efforts of the Ore-
gon State Police and the Lincoln County Sheriff’s
Office. Nor did they rally in support of one coura-
geous Toledo police officer who had been fired
for being kind to the accuser during the trial.
In my experience, we judge crimes far too
much by what we think of the victim. I know the
truth is always present somewhere beneath the
rhetoric. So instead of displaying blind allegiance
to doctrinaire groups, I looked at the crime and
the criminal. According to newspaper accounts,
the acquitted officer was accused of a bullying
crime. I wanted to know if he was a bully in oth-
er areas. Had he been accused of “excessive
force” as a police officer?…Yes. Was he rougher
with marginalized populations than he was with
the general public?…Yes. Did he make a point of
ingratiating himself with superiors, particularly by
favor-trading?…Yes. Was he unprofessional with
people he supervised or volunteers under his
command?…Yes.
The Lincoln County Sheriff’s Office investigat-
ed complaints from the original accuser that the
Continued on Page 3