Creswell Oregon, The Dysfunctional City Where Dreams Go To Die

 

Sunday, May 20, 2012


Welcome to the City of Creswell.Com. First we must mention, this is NOT the official website for our city. It was intended to be a site to talk about a city that once had the reputation of being the "Friendly City." Sadly, this is no longer the case. Please keep your comments coming and tell us your feelings and experiences with our city administration.
Is a RECALL The Right Thing To Do?

First, we have a previous City Councilor, Bob Millam, being the head of a committee to recall the very energetic first term City Councilor, AJ O'Connell. The part that is interesting, is the fact that Mr. Millam has not been seen at a council meeting since AJ O'Connell has been on the council.

Why now, is Mr. Millam spending his time and efforts to remove Councilor O'Connell with a recall petition when he as a councilor didn't have the time to respond to continuants? In-fact, here is what Mr. Millam had to say when asked for his help.

"Sorry for not getting back with you sooner. I have had a lot on my plate with several night meetings, work and family matters. I have no problem getting back to you, I just have been over extended. I am not on this e-mail address very often partially because of very little correspondence ( I will make the effort to check it more often). I also prefer to think things through, and, do some checking into things before making any comments. With this being said, I will get back to you either the week after Christmas or the week after New Years the latest. I wish you and your family peace through the Holiday's Regards, Bob,

We NEVER heard back from "Councilor Millam" He never acted like he had ANY concern or was willing to honor his commitment. Millam was quoted as saying "When you are sworn into office, you agree to go by the rules and do the job you're elected to do." If he didn't have time to actually represent the people and do the job he was elected to do, why now does he have time to criticize another councilor? Nevertheless, the bottom line is this, should a councilor be "Recalled" because he came up with some ideas that may not be workable and didn't agree with our present mayor and his council?

Should the Creswell taxpayers have to come up with yet another wasted $8,000 to fight our democratic system and abuse the recall option? If the voters don't care for AJ, let them vote him out of office when his time is up. This is just one more attempt to take away our rights and spend money. While the mayor said he didn't have anything to do with this recall petition, he certainly could have discouraged it and saved our city the money this will cost.

AJ, fought for the people of Creswell and voted against finishing the unnecessary city hall. He voted to not pay an attorney $125,000 to "get started" to vigorously fight the skydiving complaint. He wanted instead, to mediate this situation. The voters will decide how wrong he was. To recall AJ, would be just one more attempt to silence someone trying to represent the people of Creswell. Unlike others on the council, If you write AJ, he will write you back or call. That is worth a great deal.

Our Mayor Talking with Lars Larson

Councilor O'Connell's Response to Mayor Hooker's 2012 State of the City Address

How does a city go from being the "Friendly City" to The Dysfunctional City?

First, you get a Mayor who does all he can to eliminate the First Amendment in the lives of his constituents. Why listen to the people he serves? Next, you convince councilors so desperately in need of being accepted by him, to give up their right to speak at meetings. Previously, there was a time for "Councilors Comments", but no more. They were convinced to vote that freedom away. These same councilors continue to agree with and vote for anything this mayor proposes.

Next, use public forums to reprimand councilors for breaking "council rules." This is not the first time our Mayor found it necessary to publicly embarrass a councilor at a public meeting. Actually, it's the third time this Mayor felt it necessary to embarrass those who will not go along with him. Another time, this Mayor removed an airport commissioner at a public meeting for having websites that did not agree with him, which is something we're sure NEVER happened with any previous Mayors. Anything that needed the attention of a previous Mayor was handled in house with dignity and concern for others feelings.

The third time this Mayor once again felt it necessary to have a special meeting to embarrass a councilor, he said the councilor broke council rule 8.2, "Failing to set an example of good ethical conduct."

It appears, this Mayor broke that rule when he showed up at a peaceful meeting of concerned citizens and later wrote a letter to our local newspaper condemning these people for peaceful assembly. Isn't that a right covered in the First Amendment? When you view the video (see link below), notice he says, "One individual who does not pay city taxes." Evidently, he thinks you have to pay city taxes in order to have the right to speak in HIS city. With this kind of thinking, our City Administrator also has no rights as he too does not live in the city or pay city taxes. You just have to watch this video. It appears this Mayor is not only failing to show good, ethical conduct, it appears he is going against the Constitution of the United States. First Amendment - an amendment to the Constitution of the United States guaranteeing the right of free expression; includes freedom of assembly and freedom of the press and freedom of religion and freedom of speech.

Maybe there should be a "Council Rule" stating, "The Mayor and councilors will not use their honorable positions against those they do not like." Nothing could be more despicable. What happened to Liberty and Justice for ALL?

We can only hope, there are enough people who will remember this come November. We believe there will be three council seats and the Mayor's position up for re-election. Let's hope we can find a Mayor and councilors who will change the rules back and let the people of Creswell be heard once again. How nice it was to be able to raise our hands during a discussion and be allowed to give input.

Our Mayor and his opinion of Freedom of Assembly

OPEN MEETING FOR CLOSED MINDS

Once again under the pretext of wanting input from the community, the Creswell City Council had a special meeting about the possibility of closing the airport. While most people who spoke were in favor of keeping the airport open, (all but one) it appeared this mayor and most of his council had their minds made up.

Those who spoke were impressive and passionate with their feelings on the airport. At least half suggested the city try to work it out with the skydiving company, "sit down and talk like adults" one man suggested.

City Administrator Mark Shrives gave the impression there was nothing they could do at this point, because of the Part 16 complaint filed by Urban Moore of Eugene Skydivers. You would think common sense would dictate if the city sat down with Mr. Moore and worked out a safety plan and other operational concerns, it would just be a matter of Mr. Moore withdrawing his Part 16 complaint.

One councilor, Jack Gradle, said Mr. Moore refused to sit down and discuss the city's concerns. According to Mr. Moore, that is totally untrue, in-fact, Mr. Moore said, " We spent from Aug 2006 trying to do just that. If you read the complaint you will see where we have tried over and over to talk to the city. That is what the informal Part 13 is all about."

After the public forum was over, Mayor Hooker made a motion to allot another $100,000 for attorney's fees to fight Mr. Moore's Part 16 complaint. Of course the same councilors, Jean McKittrick, Mike Anderson and Jack Gradle couldn't wait to raise their hands to once again go along with this mayor. (none have airport experience) Jane Vincent and A J O'Connell were the dissenting votes. In-fact, Councilor O'Connell gave very compelling reasons why the city should try to work this out and save taxpayer's money.

From all indications, there is no way the city can close the airport, high priced attorney's or not. Evidently, when the city accepted federal funding, they agreed to keep the airport open for a period of time, most say twenty years. There is a huge possibility the city will not only lose the legal battle and taxpayer's money, they will still be forced to keep the airport open. That possibility could go in many directions. The city could continue to take money from the general fund, lease it out to someone with the experience to manage it, or let the State of Oregon manage it as they do so well at some 28 state airports.

All in all, there is no excuse for the outcome of the special meeting. Once again, this Mayor and council did not listen to the people who cared enough to share their feelings and were willing to speak up. One person mentioned the city once hired Jim Johnson to do a survey on how other Oregon Airports are managed. The fact is, if this city once again hired Mr. Johnson instead of out of town attorney's, this problem could be resolved. Mr. Johnson is a very knowledgeable and reasonable man, he could fix this problem and save the City of Creswell a great deal of money and frustration.

On another premise, one would think a city administrator and airport manager that is costing the taxpayers over $225,000 per year, with the help of the city's attorney, could answer the FAA's letter. Just be honest and explain their position. Did they really need an attorney for that?

Award Winning Mayor

After reading Mayor Hooker received an Outstanding Elected Official award from LCOG, (Lane Council of Governments) one can only guess what kind of an organization that might be. It's been suggested that LCOG was a bit like the Better Business Bureau, if you donate enough money to them, they will give you a good rating.

Since Creswell gives money to LCOG, is it possible they decided to ask LCOG to make the Creswell mayor look good with some kind of an award since there has been so much negative press during his term in office.

Under this mayor's leadership, most councilors blindly followed his lead and voted to give up their right to make comments at council meetings. (Their 1st amendment right) All this, to keep one young enthusiastic councilor from making suggestions or comments.

Under this mayor, putting an item on the agenda by a councilor or citizen, has changed. It has become very confusing as to how this works. You can ask to have something put on the agenda, then it goes to the city administrator and back to the mayor and his council for their approval.

Under this mayor, there have been airport fees raised based on misinformation, and he refuses to listen to proof that the council was mislead because he doesn't like the person who is being charged those fees. He even ignored the recommendation of the Creswell Airport commission.

Under this mayor, if you would like to speak at a council meeting. It must now be done during a "Public Forum" and you have three minutes, but first, you must fill out a form and put down what you wish to speak about. Maybe he won't let you?

Under this mayor you can not raise your hand and ask a question about something he and the council are discussing and later voting on. They can spend the taxpayer's money, and the taxpayers have NO say.

Under this mayor, there is an upcoming special meeting, "City Council to Discuss Future of Creswell Airport on February 14, 2012." They don't know how to manage an airport, so they are talking about closing it. If this mayor hasn't checked with his legal department he should have, he would have found the FAA will not let him close the airport after accepting federal funding, AIP money..

All in all, there has to be the big question, why would an organization like LCOG give this mayor an award? Under this mayor, Creswell is not a pleasant or friendly place to live.

PAST NEWS

It would be safe to say, the October 10th Creswell City Council meeting will be long remembered by those in attendance.

When the meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM sharp by Mayor Hooker, there was little to resemble a typical city council meeting. Unlike most meetings with usually less than fifteen people in the audience, this meeting had anywhere between 80 to 110 people. There seemed to be more feeling during the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag, especially with, "One Nation Under God, with Liberty and Justice for All."

Not ironically, that seemed to be the theme of several of the speakers who took advantage of their public forum time.

Prior to the public forum, there was a presentation by Mr. Ken Nagao about the City Hall 2nd floor Project. It seemed Mr. Nagao realized that many people in the audience were not there to see the city hall project. He politely seemed to expedite his presentation and received a nice round of applause from the large audience. Next, Lane County Sheriff, Sgt. Doug Osborne gave a presentation about retrieving prescription drugs that were no longer being used. He was recommending that these drugs be removed and deposited anonymously at the sheriff's office to prevent misuse by teens. It was a brief presentation which ended with another round of applause from the audience.

Next, there was a presentation by City Attorney, Ken Jones, who outlined what a resolution should say for the "Racist Free Zone". He too received a polite round of applause. Before there was a vote, AJ O'Connell made a motion to amend the resolution to include, physically disadvantaged, sexual orientation, age, etc. This created a rather contentious discussion that ended with the other councilors agreeing with AJ. Unfortunately, a man in the audience screamed, "Atta boy AJ." This caught the audience and mayor by surprise. The mayor warned this man and the audience that disorderly outbursts would not be tolerated and he would clear the room. City Attorney, Ross Williamson then explained the new council rules Resolution 2011-19 that seems to take away from the councilors their right to enter items for the agenda. They would now have to go through Mark Shrives who would take it to the mayor who would bring it to the entire council to see if they wanted that item on the agenda. During this discussion with Ross Williamson, AJ O'Connell asked a question using the word WE, Councilor McCoy asked, "You keep saying we, who is we?" AJ responded, "We the people, the people I represent." The audience applauded and the mayor said,"That's it, Sheriff, clear the room." The audience was in shock, they couldn't believe what they just heard. Most got up and meandered towards the door. Lane County Commissioner Rob Handy who was in the audience waiting to speak, refused to leave the room. He obviously knew this was not the way to run a meeting and it appears he may have convinced Mark Shrives to resend the mayors order to clear the room. Mr. Shrives came to the meeting room exit door where many audience members were still standing in disbelief and announced that the meeting would resume at 8:05.

Evidently, it was ok to applaud the man who designed the over priced, far too large city hall, the Sheriff and City Attorney, but not OK for the audience members to applaud a councilor or the others who spoke at the podium. You would think the audience would be allowed to applaud the speakers as a first amendment right, freedom of expression. A few people caught themselves almost applauding and stopped before the mayor had the chance to clear the room once again. Would you believe this is the same mayor who said, "People should come to meetings and participate." You can participate as long as you agree with this mayor, it seems his slogan is, go along to get along. He actually was able to convince most of his councilors to give up the rights they once had regarding meetings. We will be telling you more about this in coming days.

You have to look at the video below to get a feel for how our mayor thinks. Here he is talking about the city hall that is four times larger than necessary. Hear him say, "We started a fund, we saved for this, we paid cash, we did this without having to go to the voters, without having to do a bond measure, we paid cash."

While Hooker was not mayor when they started that "fund" just who's money does he think it was in the first place? In order for the city to "save" that kind of money, someone was being overcharged for something, guess who. Then he says, "If people would participate they would know what's going on. They should come to meetings."

Now, that does sound like a good idea, to participate, just how does that work these days? Can you call and discuss problems with your elected councilors? Are your councilors allowed to meet with you and discuss concerns? Not under this mayor, here is what he has to say about councilors talking city business with their constituents.

"You are free to have general conversations with myself or anyone on the council, but they will not be conversations discussing the day to day administration of the city. This is not and never has been the purpose of the mayor and council. In the past, some councilors have felt it was appropriate to circumvent the system and attempt to resolve issues without going through the proper process. This will no longer be happening. Day to day issues or concerns should be directed to the city administrator, not the mayor or councilors. Bob Hooker" Mayor

About, "Some councilors have felt it was appropriate to circumvent the system" These were councilors willing to talk with their constituants to understand better their concerns and problems. They were then able to relate their finding to the mayor and rest of the council to expedite solutions. This is no longer allowed in Creswell.

Here, in part, is what Mayor Piercy had to say when asked how she felt with her councilors meeting with individuals and groups.

"Each councilor is different and would have to address this themselves. All of them meet with numerous neighborhood associations on a regular basis to discuss neighborhood issues in their wards. Most also routinely deal with individual issues of concern and help facilitate city responses as appropriate. They are all pretty diligent about this. Some have more time available than others depending on their everyday work schedules. They also get invited to speak in various places and to work on issues with others of special interest to them. Kitty," Mayor of Eugene

At the February 8th City Council meeting, Mayor Hooker gave his State of the City Address. He mentioned how difficult the economy has been and yet a great deal of money was spent to build a new water plant and city hall. He didn't mention as a result, Creswell has one of the highest water rates in the state or that there could be some relief in the future. He said these projects created jobs. One can only ask, how many jobs did it create for the people of Creswell?

He mentioned the city would continue to pay for the Rick Dancer communications infomercials to enhance economic development. Again, we have to ask, how many jobs has this expensive program created? While Rick Dancer is a credible, dynamic person, he once said while running for office, "It's not right to charge tax payers for a process they can not participate in." And yes, the taxpayers are paying for these infomercials. Maybe Mr. Dancer should interview the remaining skydiving business owner or maybe the one who had his hangar confiscated by the city after being put out of business, a hangar that cost him $160,000. Yes, get the money that was owed to the city, but why not give him the remainder? That would have been the right thing to do.

Maybe he could interview the couple who built their dream home on the airport only to have their airport access increased some 3,000 percent. The first increase from $25.00 per year to $180.00 per year was reasonable and consistent with what the state charges at other airports for the same privilege. But to have raised this fee to $740.00 per year, based on false information, has put a hardship on an already heavily taxed property.

It was a nice thought that things could have changed for the best with the beginning of the New Year. That was not to be.

You would think there would be some disappointment by the mayor and council that only fourteen people (out of 4,700) showed up to the first City Council meeting of the year. Maybe they were relieved, people that show up usually have concerns that are seldom resolved.

It's amazing that the mayor said we should come to meetings and participate. Here are the rules for "Participating." Public Forum , Maximum time 30 minutes. Speakers will be limited to three (3) minutes each. The Council will not engage in any discussion or make any decisions based on public comment at this time; however, they may take comments under advisement for discussion and action at a future Council meeting.

So much for a fresh start

Is this really his idea of participating? Why not let an audience member raise a hand and ask a question about the discussion at hand, that's participating. Wouldn't it be nice if our mayor made the following New Years Resolutions

While we would like to start off the new year with a clean slate, it couldn't hurt to have a short list of what we would like to see for our city in 2011.

 

First, wouldn't it be nice if our Mayor retracted this statement:

 

"Citizens  are free to have general conversations with myself or anyone on the council, but they will not be conversations discussing the day to day administration of the city.  This is not and never has been the purpose of the mayor and council.  In the past, some councilors have felt it was appropriate to circumvent the system and attempt to resolve issues without going through the proper process.  This will no longer be happening.  Day to day issues or concerns should be directed to the city administrator, not the mayor or councilors.  The purpose of the mayor and council is to make policy for the city and direct city staff to carry out that policy.."

 

Instead, wouldn't it be nice if our Mayor encouraged people to contact their elected representative first before taking time from a busy staff?  A willing council member could meet with individuals and groups and listen to whatever concerns they may have and to then bring these concerns and possible solutions to the entire council for resolutions, and not bog down our City Administrator unnecessarily with less than important matters.

 

Wouldn't it be nice if there was more compassion for those Creswell residents who are struggling with one of the highest water rates in the state.  Maybe find a solution to refinance and cut unnecessary spending.

 

The mayor said in his infomercial," People should come to council meetings, they need to participate." 

 

 

Wouldn't it  be nice, if before our mayor asks a councilor to resign or reprimand another in public or dismiss an airport commissioner, that he first sat down one on one, to see what these people had on their mind and why?  Would that not be the best way to manage people, by hearing them out and not dismiss or censure without a conversation?  Is it possible our mayor might learn something that may be a benefit to our city?  If not, and a reprimand is in order, why not do that properly in an executive session?

 

Most importantly, wouldn't it be a good thing for our mayor to look close at his motives before taking action and ask himself, "Am I misusing my trusted position."

 

With these few Principles we can only hope and wish to have a fresh start for the New Year.     

 

 

 

 

   

 

  

 

 

Creswell Weather

HEALTHY LIVING
We are fortunate to have our very own Wellness Clinic. Visit this site for great health information.

Viewpoint Yours And Ours
Write Viewpoint, We Are Interested.

Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful committed citizens can change the world. Indeed it is the only thing that ever has.

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. Martin Luther King, Jr.

We would like to hear your suggestions.
email.gif (24903 bytes)

Creswell Airport

[ Yahoo! ] options

This is an unofficial site.