Associated Press
May 5, 2009

KTVZ.com

May 5, 2009

Weren’t the old median barriers ‘perfectly good?’

By Rodger Nichols
of The Dalles Chronicle

     State legislators are in the busiest of times in Salem these days as major pieces of legislation start to move through the system.
     That doesn’t mean legislators aren’t paying attention to the folks back home.
Take the case of Rep. John Huffman whose sprawling House District 59 covers all or part of nine counties, including Wasco and Sherman.
     “We got a call from a constituent in Mosier,” said Huffman. “They wanted to know why road crews were replacing perfectly good median barriers on Interstate 84.”
Huffman, who serves on the House Ways and Means Subcommittee On Transportation and Economic Development, asked that same question of Oregon Department of Transportation representatives as the large transportation bill moves through the committee process.
     The short answer he got was that the old 32-inch-tall tongue-and-groove median barriers on that section of the highway are not “perfectly good” any longer. They do not meet current federal highway standards, particularly in accidents involving the much heavier trucks prowling today’s highways.
     They have been replaced elsewhere on the Interstate with 42-inch-tall pin-and-loop barriers. The greater height and heavier weight do a better job of what the median is designed to do in case of an accident — push the vehicle back into its own lane, rather than allow it to cross into oncoming traffic.
     That’s the short answer.
     The long answer is more complicated and interesting.
     Recently, project and operations engineer Brad DeHart of ODOT in The Dalles, and Peter Murphy of ODOT Region 4 in Bend gave The Chronicle a tour of the project, which involves replacing the median between milepost 64.81, just east of Hood River, to Milepost 70.1 near Mosier.
     They said that this stretch of median was originally scheduled for replacement in 2004, when the freeway was being repaved in that area. It would have been replaced at that time with the 42-inch pin-and-loop barriers.
     But in 2004 the Columbia River Gorge Commission was involved with a review of the Gorge Management Plan, the document that must be adhered to for any new construction in the gorge, including Interstate 84.
     “We had rules in the gorge management plan for all development, but they really weren’t specific to transportation projects,” said Brian Litt, the commission’s planning manager.
     That led to the formation of a group of stakeholders that included the gorge commission, the Forest Service, Counties, ODOT and the Federal Highway Administration.
     The goal was to create design guidelines for highway features and projects on I-84 that would be consistent with the Scenic Area Act and the Gorge Management Plan.
     “It was a year and half process that included nearly 400 participants throughout the gorge,” said Kristin Stallman, National Scenic Area coordinator for ODOT.
     While that was under way, ODOT removed the median replacement portion from the 2004 work plan.
     That was a good move. The I-84 Corridor Strategy design guidelines weren’t finished until the end of 2005.
     Those requirements resulted in a new median barrier design that is seven inches shorter (35 inches instead of the now-standard 42), is cast in place instead of being assembled in sections, and painted a brown earth tone.
     The shorter height allows for better visibility of the views in the gorge, the earth-toned paint is less noticeable than concrete gray, and the cast-in-place design is safer, because it’s less likely to be pushed out of the way in an accident involving a heavy truck.
     Both the old tongue-and-groove design and the newer 45-inch pin-and-loop design being replaced were precast in 12.5 foot sections that were hooked together, but not specifically anchored to the pavement.
     In accident situations, the tongue-and-groove design tended to be broken up by impact, while the heavier 42-inch sections tended to remain intact.
     “You sometimes see them shifted over,” after an accident, said Brad DeHart. “We go back and pull them into place.”
     The new 35-inch design, being shorter, is lighter in weight, but that’s offset by being anchored to the pavement.
     The current project, known as Bundle 225, includes other improvements along the Hood River to Mosier stretch, including grading, drainage and paving.
     It’s also the first project to use the new gorge-compatible cast-in-place design.
Brian Litt of the gorge commission said the idea is not to just tear down existing barriers to put up some new ones because they’ll be painted earth tones.
     “The idea is, when you do need to replace those barriers, you replace them with this type, consistent with the overall design guidelines,” he said. “Neither the gorge commission nor the Forest Service nor ODOT wants to spend money unnecessarily or do anything that compromises safety”
     Kristin Stallman agrees: “That median needed to be replaced for safety reasons,” she said. “We weren’t just doing it for the scenic.”
     The “plan” is that all median barrier will someday be replaced, but it won’t happen quickly .The 42-inch barriers now installed on most of the freeway won’t be replaced until they are no longer safe
     “We’re doing another project between Multnomah Falls and Cascade locks, and the median barrier there was fine and of the proper kind, so it didn’t need to be replaced,” said Stallman. “On that project we’re replacing the guardrail with core ten weathering steel which is the new guardrail standard. Whenever we need to replace guardrail, we’ll replace it with the new standard.”
     Real life conditions have caused one change in the implementation of the new design: the addition of scuppers. Those are the channels at the base of the median which allow accumulating rainwater to flow to the other side of the median to reach drains.
     “There was a general feeling by the engineers that there was sufficient grade, that whatever water would be there would drain into the installed drains and into the drainage system,” said ODOT’s Peter Murphy.
     “We did think about it, but we thought wrong,” he said. “Now we have gone back in with scuppers that and being poured in place and retrofitted. People listened. It’s a good example of what can work.”
     The nice thing for taxpayers is that the new design is actually cheaper than the 42-inch standard design.
     The most recent bids for 42 inch tall median barrier in Oregon were last year, said Murphy. The average contract price was $66.07 per foot on a total of 32,544 feet that were installed on various projects all over the state.
     This year, the Hood River-to Mosier contract for the 35-inch cast-in-place barrier was for 29,250 feet $44.75 per foot, just about a third less than last year’s statewide average for the 42 inch style.
     “Remember, that’s a bid on a job, and different bids on different jobs have different numbers.” said Murphy. “But that’s what the bid is on this job.”
     Murphy, who came to ODOT following a long career as a broadcaster said, “What I have found as a layman coming in, is the engineers actually give quite a bit of thought to what it is they are doing. People can find fault in what they get, but they don’t just pull this stuff out of the air; they spend more time than you and I would care to think.”
Brad DeHart agreed. “As an engineer, I lie awake at night thinking about these things.”
     And the inquiry that started it all?
     “I’ve been encouraging state agencies to do a better job at getting the word out early,” said Rep. John Huffman
     “If ODOT had just sat down with The Chronicle and told them ‘You’re going to be seeing the barricades being redone through here, and here’s why,’ That would go a long way on helping people’s perception.
     “An ounce of information in advance can save you a ton of grief down the road.”

KUOW News
www.kuow.org

04/13/2009

In a year of budget cuts, nothing is sacred. The Oregon School for the Blind has weathered many financial storms in the past. But this year could be different. With every dollar under scrutiny, Oregon lawmakers today (Friday) gave initial approval to a plan to shut the Oregon School for the Blind down in a matter of months. The money would serve blind students elsewhere.

June Kramer is legally blind and uses a cane to get around. She came to the Oregon School for the Blind because she wanted to learn something more than her local high school could provide.

Kramer: "Budgeting, banking, basically daily living skills like doing your own laundry."

And learning how to cook. That’s what she’s doing now behind the counter of the school’s coffeeshop.

Kramer: "Order up! Burrito!"

The work is part of the school’s life skills curriculum. Does your local high school have a talking cash register?

Cash Register: "One–Five–Zero. Department One."

Kramer is 20 years old, so regardless of what happens in the Legislature, she’ll soon be leaving the Oregon School for the Blind.

Kramer: "I hope to be in my own apartment, getting a job somewhere like in a music store or whatever and basically be a successful woman in life, if possible."

Even though she’s moving on, Kramer says she’s worried that other visually impaired students in Oregon won’t have the same opportunities she did. And she’s not alone in her concerns.

Members of the blind community have been protesting at the Oregon capitol. They’re here lobbying against a bill that would close down the School for the Blind. Joe Carter attended the school for three years as a teenager. He says it was a life–changing experience:

Carter: "For the first time I actually knew other blind people. For the first time, I had friends. For the first time, somebody actually suggested that I could do stuff. I could go places on my own."

Advocates for the blind say those are the kinds of things that will be lost if visually impaired students are dispersed back into their local school districts. On the other hand, the vast majority of blind students in Oregon are already educated by local public schools. Fewer than three dozen still attend the Salem campus. That’s one reason the cost per–student to operate the School for the Blind exceeds $125,000. Democratic Representative Sara Gelser says it’s money that could be better spent elsewhere:

Gelser: "So what we have is a program that is much loved by the people that are there, but we are spending an extraordinary resource for 31 students, and at the same time not giving them access to K–12 curriculum, and they are not learning in an accredited environment."

In other words, students at the School for the Blind learn life skills, but they won’t get a diploma there. Gelser says she acknowledges the sense of loss that students and their families are facing. But she says the goal is that they’ll be better served in the end:

Gelser: "This plan does not save a dime. What it does instead is directs these resources, redeploys them for the benefit of 840 children who are blind and visually impaired. And I can go to my colleagues and say ‘In a time of budget cuts, let’s make a positive policy decision that’s focused on how do we make the best use of resources that we already have."

Gelser chairs the House Education committee, which has now approved the plan to close the school. Republican Representative John Huffman supported the proposal, but he says he’s worried that blind students won’t get the services they need when they return to their home districts:

Huffman: "I will be quite angry if I hear of those situations of kids being brought into the school district and stuffed into a closet, out of sight out of mind. I don’t want to hear about that."

Committee chair Gelser says she’ll hold hearings later this year to investigate claims by blind students of mistreatment by teachers and administrators in the mainstream school system. The bill to close the School for the Blind still has to clear several Legislative hurdles before it would take effect. I’m Chris Lehman in Salem.

© Copyright 2009, OPB

By Nick Budnick / The Bulletin Published: April 04. 2009 4:00AM PST

Tentative figures for 2009-11

$17.1B
General fund budget to maintain existing services

$4.4B
Legislature’s prediction for general fund shortfall

$2.58B
Budget shortfall if all reserve funds are used

A few possible cuts

100 State troopers laid off

3 Days per week courts would close

20% Length cut from school year

At the root of the new development is the worsening economic situation and a projected decline in personal and corporate income taxes.

A formal announcement won’t come until later this month, but the tentative estimate is that the state’s next general fund budget will total $12.7 billion, about $4.4 billion less than what’s necessary to pay for existing state services.

On Friday, the heads of the Joint Ways and Means Committee posted cuts on a new Web site to show what 30 percent cuts to agencies could look like and announced that a series of hearings would be held around the state, including in Bend on April 29.

Sen. Margaret Carter, D-Portland, said the potential cuts serve “as a reality check, the reality that Oregon is facing a great challenge. … It’s going to be very, very important that the people of Oregon help us to prioritize.”

The possible cuts include:

•Reduction and elimination of services for the poor, elderly, disabled and mentally ill.

•Layoffs of 100 state troopers.

•Closing courts as much as three days a week.

•Cutting the school year by 20 percent, or nearly two months.

•Repeal of last year’s Measure 57 tough-sentencing law.

•Closing 10 prisons, including Deer Ridge Correctional Institution in Madras.

Carter’s co-chairman on the committee, Rep. Peter Buckley, D-Ashland, said that overall, the average cut to state agencies would likely be closer to 15 to 18 percent range, thanks to $911 million in federal stimulus dollars and other reserves, including the state’s rainy day fund.

But some agencies would likely be spared the worst of it, meaning deeper cuts would have to be made to others, he said, saying closing schools early “scares the hell out of me.”

That said, he and Carter acknowledged that the budget deficit could grow even larger than the current $4.4 billion estimate.

Besides making cuts, lawmakers are considering raising revenue using new fees, increased cigarette, beer and corporate taxes along with a temporary income-tax surcharge on top-earning Oregonians.

Local officials are bracing themselves for potential reductions in state funding filtering down to counties and schools.

Bend-La Pine Superintendent Ron Wilkinson said that in “the best-case scenario we’re working with, we’ve got to cut quite a bit of money next year.”

In a worst-case scenario, “If you’re cutting one third of the budget, that could represent 20 percent or a quarter of the school year,” he said. “It would be devastating.”

Hillary Saraceno, the executive director of the Deschutes County Commission on Children and Families, receives more than $1 million to distribute to programs for parenting skills, runaway and homeless youth, and children at risk of abuse and neglect. At the upper level of possible cuts, “some programs would probably go away,” she said.

Ron Paradis, a spokesman for Central Oregon Community College, said that at a 30 percent level of cuts, “We’re likely talking $10 to $15 per year per credit tuition increases or cutting as much as 10 percent of courses each year,” he said.

As for the potential effect on plans to expand Deer Ridge, the Department of Corrections listed delaying adding new inmates to the prison as among its first options to be considered, saving about $23 million.

Complete closure of the prison would save another $42 million. However, that option was listed as a last resort, only to be considered if 30 percent cuts were made to the department’s budget.

“We’re like the other nine institutions, waiting to see what the Legislature has to say about how deep they have to go with their cuts,” said Parrish Van Wert, the community development coordinator for Deer Ridge.

Local lawmakers say the release of the potential cuts is an effort to make the best of a bad situation.

“It’s pretty drastic stuff,” said Rep. Judy Stiegler, D-Bend. “I think this is the kind of thing that people need to look at and mull and think, ‘Gee, is this the way we’re going to go?’”

Rep. John Huffman, R-The Dalles, said that while he approves of the way Democrats are publicizing the decisions to be made, he thinks the state needs to do more to trim salaries and payrolls: “As of yet, I haven’t seen anything out of leadership that gets into removing certain departments and programs. I think that’s the level that we need to get to.”

The final schedule of budget meetings, times and locations is expected to be posted next week.

For more details on the potential cuts, see www.leg.state.or.us/budget/.

Bulletin reporters Sheila G. Miller , Hillary Borrud and Lauren Dake contributed to this story.

Nick Budnick can be reached at 503-566-2839 or at nbudnick@bendbulletin.com.

SALEM — The Oregon House approved an anti-bullying bill Wednesday after legislators argued over whether schools could handle the problem on their own.

The final vote on House Bill 2599 was 50-9, with all the no votes from minority Republicans. The bill now moves to the Senate.

The proposal would require school districts to establish clear, uniform policies to combat bullying and to appoint specific individuals to investigate incidents.

Rep. Kim Thatcher, R-Keizer, said testimony from bullied schoolchildren "broke my heart" and that her own children have been taunted. But she objected to language in the bill defining "harassment, intimidation or bullying" to include any act that interferes with the "psychological well-being" of a student or any act that stems from the student’s "protected class status."

Rep. Vicki Berger, R-Salem, agreed that the overly broad language would pave the way to "endless lawsuits." Local school boards, said Rep. Sal Esquivel, R-Medford, should decide the best way to deal with this age-old matter.

"We’ve had bullying ever since we’ve had more than two children in the world," he said.

But not all schools take the issue seriously enough and need a nudge from the state, said Rep. John Huffman, R-The Dalles. He carried the proposal.

One legislator grew emotional in her floor speech, much to her surprise. "I, too, know what it’s like to be bullied and picked on," said Rep. Suzanne VanOrman, D-Hood River.

She explained later that she had polio as a child, giving her a noticeable limp.

"It’s hard to know why kids pick on kids," she said.

A recent survey by the Oregon Students of Color Coalition showed 41 percent of eighth-graders in Oregon reported being subjected to name-calling, bullying or other harassment at school, with the highest rates among students of color, girls and gays.

Basic Rights Oregon, a gay rights organization, applauded the bill’s passage and urged the Senate to do the same.

The Oregonian
by Bill Graves
March 02, 2009

The seventh-grade girls in Mark Leichty’s science class at North Albany Middle School said he knelt by their desks, put his arm around their shoulders and let his hand slip down near or on their breasts.

Leichty said he knelt beside the girls to talk to them privately and rested his arm on the back of their seats. He may have inadvertently touched their shoulders, he said, but he didn’t touch their breasts.

During a five-day hearing two years ago, the case boiled down to the teacher’s word against his students. A wrong decision would either unfairly ruin a man’s career or expose teenage girls to a sex offender at school.

Leichty’s case illustrates what’s at stake as legislators craft new laws to try to improve school defenses against educators who sexually abuse children. Lawmakers have drafted seven bills to try to resolve the same questions that confront administrators: What teacher conduct constitutes a boundary violation? What is necessary to prove misconduct? Should unproven allegations be included in personnel files?

Lobbyists for teachers, administrators and school boards are meeting with lawmakers to try to resolve those questions.

"Yes, we want to protect the school kids of Oregon, but we also want to remember the teachers have rights too," said Rep. John Huffman, R-The Dalles, member of the House Education Committee.

One measure under consideration is House Bill 2062, which would bar administrators from making deals to conceal an educator’s misconduct in exchange for his or her resignation. The Oregonian documented 47 secret agreements and described the practice, known among educators as passing the trash, in a two-part series last year.

Administrators sometimes resorted to confidential agreements in cases clouded by doubt. A teacher, for example, would be charged with improperly touching students without solid evidence. Or teachers would violate student boundaries with personal comments, suggestive notes or inappropriate invitations, yet commit no crime.

The simplest way to get such teachers away from students is to persuade them to resign. So administrators sometimes offered to keep the accusations against educators secret, even write recommendation letters, if they would leave quietly.

Salem-Keizer School District in 2004, for example, cut a secret deal with Kenneth John Cushing, then 44. Administrators wanted to get him away from middle school students while the Teacher Standards and Practices Commission, the agency that licenses and disciplines teachers, investigated allegations that he inappropriately touched at least eight girls. Officials promised not to reveal his behavior if potential employers called looking for references.

Legislators want to ban such deals without violating the rights of teachers

Sexual misconduct "is a career ender for educators," said Chuck Bennett, Lobbyist for the Confederation of Oregon School Administrators.

Mark Leichty can testify to that.

On Feb. 11, 2004, his 43rd birthday, he was called into the vice principal’s office and told he was being charged with touching the breast of a girl in his science class.

"That absolutely devastated me," he said. "I didn’t even know who it was."

His problems started in the previous year, when three female students complained that he touched their breasts. One would later say he rubbed her back and shoulder but did not touch her breast.

Leichty denied touching any girl improperly. His vice principal, however, warned him in a letter that "touching of any kind that makes a child or staff member feel uncomfortable is inappropriate."

The letter gave weight to the charge he faced a year later on his birthday from a female student who, with several misspellings, wrote:

"He lend over me and put his left arm on my shoulder. Next he slid his hand closer to my brest. Slides hand down to brest above nibl."

Leichty said he did not touch the girl’s breast, but he did try to befriend her in class as part of a mentoring program for which he volunteered.

In March 2004, Leichty was arrested and charged with eight counts of first-degree sexual abuse based on accusations of improperly touching the girl and other female students during the previous school year.

His teaching days were over.

More than a year passed before the Benton County district attorney’s office dismissed criminal charges against Leichty. By then, parents of two of the girls he was accused of touching had filed a civil suit against him and the district. All parties settled out of court for undisclosed terms.

Then in 2006, the Teacher Standards and Practices Commission charged Leichty with gross misconduct and prepared to yank his license. He exercised his right to an administrative hearing.

During the five-day hearing in October 2006 in Salem, detectives, school administrators and three middle school girls testified against Leichty. Sixteen people, including many fellow teachers, parents and several students, defended him.

The judge noted that during depositions for the civil case, the girls’ accounts of "when and how often the touching occurred differed from their initial statements and complaints."

After hearing the arguments, the judge recommended Leichty be reprimanded and put on probation for two years, which would have allowed him to return to the classroom. He had a clean record after 17 years of teaching, with consistently positive evaluations and praise from many students who admired him, the judge said.

But the teacher standards commission concluded there was a preponderance of evidence showing Leichty improperly touched students "on or near their breasts," warranting the revocation of his license.

Leichty now runs a plant nursery that he started on the Albany farm where he grew up. He could apply to renew his license. He’s even had job offers from other schools.

But Leichty said he isn’t ready to go back into a classroom. False allegations, he said, have cost him his career, his reputation and tens of thousands of dollars in earnings.

"How do we protect people in my position?" he asked. "Because the reality is there are mistakes that get made."

That question has complicated several bills the Legislature is wrestling with. Senate Bill 48 would make it a felony crime, rape in the third degree, for any school employee to engage in sex with a student, even if the student is 18, the age of consent, or older.

Legislators are amending that bill so that teachers would lose their licenses for having sex with an older student, as most do now, but not go to jail, said Sen. Floyd Prozanski, D-Eugene, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee where the bill is expected to be introduced.

Senate Bill 45 mandates that an educator suspected of a boundary violation could not work directly with children in a school, community college, university or child care facility until the charge is investigated. Now it is possible for suspected educators to keep teaching while they are being investigated, said Vickie Chamberlain, executive director of the teacher commission.

That bill will be merged with House Bill 2062, which would not only ban secret deals but also allow parents to sue any district that concealed the misconduct of an educator who abused their child, said Rep. Sara Gelser, D-Corvallis, chairwoman of the House Education Committee. The House bill also will be broadened to apply to all school employees, not just licensed educators, she said.

"My commitment is that we are going to pass a bill out," Gelser said. "The primary thing is it is going to keep kids safe. And we are going to do it in a way that doesn’t end the career of educators who actually didn’t do anything wrong."

Bill Graves: billgraves@news.oregonian.com

SALEM-Rep. John Huffman (R-The Dalles) has been appointed Assistant Republican Whip by House Republican Leader Bruce Hanna (R-Roseburg). The appointment enables Rep. Huffman to advance the caucus’ legislative agenda in the Oregon House of Representatives.
 
"It is an honor to be appointed to this leadership position in the House Republican caucus," Rep. Huffman said. "This appointment enables me to play an important role in the caucus’ efforts to improve the economy, promote fiscal responsibility and ensure government accountability."
 
Rep. Huffman will work closely with Rep. Hanna, Deputy Leader Kevin Cameron (R-Salem) and Republican Whip Ron Maurer (R-Grants Pass) on major legislative issues. Rep. Hanna said he chose Rep. Huffman because of his strong work ethic and ability to work effectively with fellow caucus members.
 
"Since he came to the House in mid-2007, Rep. Huffman has become a respected and valued member of our caucus," Rep. Hanna said. "I am pleased to have him on our leadership team. We will count on Rep. Huffman over the coming months to help us achieve our shared goal of building a better Oregon."

###

Public meetings set this week in Madras and Sisters

By Nick Budnick
The Bend Bulletin

February 8, 2009

SALEM — Hasina Squires, a lobbyist for a proposal to build a destination resort inside the Metolius River Basin, says that at a Jan. 9 meeting in Sisters, top aides to Gov. Ted Kulongoski informed her they had the necessary votes in the Legislature to pass a protection plan blocking her client’s project.

“I would disagree with that,” she says was her response.

One month later, Squires is all smiles as she works the halls of the Capitol, and it appears Kulongoski may have more of a fight on his hands than he bargained for.

Amid heavy lobbying, battle lines are taking shape in Salem over the two destination resorts proposed for the Metolius River Basin as well as on a push to tighten the rules on such resorts statewide.

“The halls are filled with lobbyists for the resorts,” said Rep. Gene Whisnant, R-Sunriver.

Two efforts to settle the Metolius issue have gathered momentum in Salem. Each proposal, one by Kulongoski and one by House Democrats, favors a different resort.

In December, Kulongoski touched off the current fracas. He asked his Department of Land Conservation and Development to designate the Metolius for special protection. On Friday, the DLCD issued a draft management plan that would affect the two proposed Metolius resorts in different ways.

Under the DLCD proposal, about 10,000 acres on the edge of the basin owned by the Ponderosa Land and Cattle Co. would be allowed to become a resort, although roughly half of its area would be barred from being developed with houses or golf courses.

The other proposal, a 675-acre resort by Dutch Pacific LLC called the Metolian — the one represented by Squires — would be barred from its current location inside the river basin. State officials are encouraging its developers to move it elsewhere, suggesting that other land previously off-limits to destination resorts could be opened up for that purpose, according to lobbyists, lawmakers and Jefferson County officials.

The Kulongoski-inspired proposal is now the subject of public hearings that start this week and of closed-door talks with county officials and developers — talks that have already begun.

In the background is similar legislation that Kulongoski has suggested for the Metolius basin but is holding in reserve to encourage compromise.

“I’ve fished and camped over there with my kids for 40 years,” Kulongoski said in an interview Thursday. “I just think that’s one of the most pristine areas in the state.”

Efforts to block development

It’s easy to see why the governor might have thought this two-pronged approach had good odds. In 2007, Metolius protection legislation cleared the Senate and appeared likely to become law before Kulongoski requested it be halted pending further review.

However, in the current session, Kulongoski’s new vision for protecting the Metolius is raising concerns among fellow Democrats. A very different approach is forming among them.

That push, spearheaded by Rep. Brian Clem, D-Salem, would block the Ponderosa resort but potentially allow the Metolian proposal to go forward. As head of the Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee, Clem is considered something of a point person among Democrats on land use issues. He said he doubts Kulongoski’s bill would even be passed out of his committee in its current form.

Clem applauds the governor’s concern for the Metolius but questions some of its details. For one thing, he feels that destination resorts should be barred not only from the basin but also from the three-mile area around it — the area in which the Ponderosa project lies.

If Kulongoski’s plan would allow the Ponderosa resort to go forward, Clem said, “that’s going to be a problem for me.”

For another thing, the Salem lawmaker says that if the Metolian’s proponents, who bill their plan as an “eco-resort,” can prove it will have no impact on the environment, then perhaps it could be allowed to proceed within the Metolius basin.

Squires, the Metolian lobbyist, has submitted draft “eco-resort” legislation with the assistance of Whisnant. Its details remain unclear. “I’ll look at it and see if I can support it” when it’s finalized, Whisnant said.

Clem said he is joined by Rep. Ben Cannon, D-Portland, in his ideas, and the two are drafting legislation along these lines. Their bill blocks traditional golf-and-subdivision destination resorts, Clem said, but “leaves the door open for things that are not destination resorts, read ‘eco-resorts.’”

While Clem is considered an important voice among moderate House Democrats, Cannon is viewed as an up-and-coming member of the more liberal wing of the party.

Clem said their joint legislation likely “represents a good idea of where the (Democratic) caucus will go on this.”

His position is echoed by House Speaker Dave Hunt, D-Gladstone, who called it “ironic” that Kulongoski’s bill on the Metolius could halt an ecologically sound proposal like the Metolian.

“My sense is that the bill, in its current form, doesn’t have much of a life,” he said.

Central Oregon lawmakers

The Metolius discussions so far have not been public, leaving Central Oregon lawmakers grasping for information.

The basin lies in the district of Rep. John Huffman, R-The Dalles. He said Friday that he is feverishly gathering information about the dueling approaches forming among the Democrats, noting that “meetings are happening as we speak.”

He said he opposes any solution that disregards local control, noting that Jefferson County has already approved destination resorts in the basin.

Whisnant, for his part, said that while he wants to protect the natural beauty of the Metolius, he also believes in property rights and is suspicious of protection efforts that he views as originating with environmentalists in Portland. “People in Portland shouldn’t dictate what happens in Central Oregon,” he said.

Rep. Judy Stiegler, D-Bend, said she is hopeful the ongoing compromise efforts she’s heard about bear fruit. In the meantime, “I’m gathering information and looking hard at the whole thing,” she said.

Other wild cards are at play in the discussion.

Environmentalists continue to push for stronger protections for the Metolius, and for stronger rules regarding destination resorts around the state.

“We’re hearing a lot of support (among lawmakers) for acting to protect the Metolius,” said Jeremiah Baumann, program director of the group Environment Oregon.

Moreover, property rights advocates are mobilizing. The Kulongoski bill included a provision that would have overruled the Measure 49 requirement that landowners be compensated if their property value was hurt by the new protection plan. Dave Hunnicutt of the group Oregonians in Action calls it “a shining example of hypocrisy.”

Clem agrees that it would be unfair to overrule Measure 49, noting that he and other Democrats campaigned for it.

If the Salem lawmaker speaks for a majority in the House, it potentially puts a major price tag on efforts to regulate destination resorts in the Metolius basin.

For the state to block the Ponderosa’s plans, the cost of compensating the firm “would be in the millions,” said the firm’s lobbyist, Rick Allen, a former Madras mayor.

Other observers think the cost could be in the tens or even hundreds of millions, depending on what plan is adopted.

Richard Whitman, the director of the Department of Land Conservation and Development, said his agency is looking at alternatives to grant relief to landowners, alternatives that don’t cost money. And he cautioned that his agency’s efforts to compromise are just beginning.

“We’re just starting the public process to get ideas for possible compromises,” he said.

The recommendation by his agency, expected to be issued in late March, must be approved by the Legislature.

Informed that his Metolius plan could face an uphill battle, Kulongoski said the various bargaining positions mean little this early in the session, which is scheduled to close at the end of June.

“None of this stuff means anything right now,” he said. “I don’t think that anything here matters until they adjourn.”

Nick Budnick can be reached at 503-566-2839 or at nbudnick@bendbulletin.com.

By Nick Budnick

The Bulletin

Pete Erickson / The Bulletin file photo

A river guide at Big Eddy on the Upper Deschutes in 2007. A bill would require life jackets on this and other Class III rapids.

 

Between May 2001 and August 2008, 10 people died on Oregon rivers in rapids rated Class III or greater. Seven occurred on the Deschutes River, one on the McKenzie River and two on the Rogue River.
Of those:
• Five were wearing their life jackets properly.
• Four were not wearing life jackets.
• One was wearing the life jacket improperly.
Currently, state law requires all people floating Class III rapids on a guided trip to wear life jackets.
A bill introduced Thursday by state Rep. John Huffman, R-The Dalles, would extend that stricture to all floaters in Class III rapids, whether or not they are on a guided trip.
Source: Oregon State Marine Board

SALEM — A group of Deschutes River safety advocates on Thursday told state lawmakers that everyone who floats rivers in Oregon should have to wear a life jacket in dangerous whitewater.

“You will never know how many lives you have saved when you pass this bill — but I will,” said Mark Angel, a Redmond-based whitewater salvage diver who estimates he’s pulled eight corpses from the waters of Oregon and California in the last decade.

The Dalles Republican Rep. John Huffman, whose district includes Jefferson County and the northwest corner of Deschutes County, has introduced a bill that would require all floaters to wear life jackets while they are traversing rapids of Class III or greater.

Since 2006, rafting companies in Bend, Maupin and elsewhere in Oregon have been required to make sure their customers wear life jackets. Guides face a $10 fine if anyone in their vessels is caught violating the law. But people who are not part of a guided trip have no requirement other than that they have life jackets somewhere in their boats.

Huffman’s bill received an informational hearing Thursday before the House Emergency Services and Veterans Affairs Committee, and is expected to receive another hearing before the committee votes on it.

Class III, or intermediate, rapids are defined as requiring complex maneuvering in tight spaces in strong currents, possibly featuring large waves and obstructions such as “strainers” — logs hiding beneath the waves that can snag a person’s body underwater and keep it there. American Whitewater, a nonprofit organization, classifies as Class III the stretch of Deschutes River between Dillon Falls and Lava Island Falls.

Class III “is where whitewater begins,” said a longtime Deschutes River patrol officer, Wasco County Marine Deputy Roger Pearce.

That level of rapids can be found on 16 rivers in Oregon, but it’s on the Deschutes River in the last decade where they’ve been the most dangerous.

From May 2001 through August, seven of the 10 whitewater fatalities in Oregon have occurred on the Deschutes. Of those, four were either not wearing life jackets or not wearing them properly.

Brandishing a cheap red life jacket in his left hand, Pearce, the river patrol officer who spearheaded the bill, told lawmakers that currently anyone can buy a $20 “rubber ducky” inflatable boat and — as long as they don’t have a guide — take on the toughest rapids in the state.

“All you have to do is take this and throw it in the bottom of your boat,” he said. “You’re legal.”

After the hearing, he said that while he sometimes goes days without spotting a rafter braving rapids without a life jacket, some days he’ll see entire boatloads. And river photographers who work for rafting companies often share their photos of rafts coming through rapids, where he sees “picture after picture” of people not wearing life jackets.

Beyond the effect on parents who lose their children, there’s also his agency’s cost of responding to river emergencies, which he said typically costs taxpayers from $1,000 to $5,000 each.

Sherry Holiday, a Wasco County commissioner who operates the county’s volunteer ambulance company, says whitewater fatalities have other costs as well. In 2006, a year when the Deschutes had six fatalities alone, “the phone stopped ringing in the middle of July” at Maupin rafting companies — which are key to the former logging town’s economy, she said.

Huffman said that just as with motorcycle helmets and seat belts, he thinks the infringement on individual rights represented by mandatory life jackets is outweighed by the benefit to society.

“There are certain things where it’s in the greater good, and you have to say, ‘We need to do this,’” he said.

No one spoke in opposition to the bill. It must be approved by both the House and the Senate in Salem before it can be signed into law by Gov. Ted Kulongoski.

Nick Budnick can be reached at 503-566-2830 or nbudnick@bendbulletin.com.