5/15/2002 letters

[May 15th, 2002] THROW THE BOOK AT WW
After reading your comments concerning the library levy [Voter's Guide, May 8, 2002], I'd like to nominate Willamette Week for Rogue of the Week. It is so glaringly obvious that you haven't done your research that it's a shame you feel compelled to express an opinion. Here are a few of the many errors you made.

As an employee of the library, I'm astonished when you say that we haven't done any belt-tightening. I and more than half of my colleagues took unpaid leave to help with the budget shortfall; there were cutbacks in programs and in the book-buying budget--and yes, unfortunately, reduced hours. You may not have noticed the belt-tightening, but the 33 employees who were laid off certainly did.

Another error that you could have rectified with a little research is your comment (did you borrow it directly from the inaccurate Oregonian article?) that many more employees have been hired than were envisioned in the 1997 levy, many of them administrators and "outreach" workers, not librarians. Our outreach staff work long, hard hours to make sure that library resources are available to everyone. And really, we have a quality library system not only through the efforts of the people who have master's degrees in library science ("librarians") but through the concerted efforts of all employees--pages, library assistants, clerks and administrators, all of whom have been working harder as demands for library service go up and up.

It's disappointing when generally civic-minded and moderate journalists misuse their influence by offering flip and irresponsible opinions. The results may damage an institution that adds immeasurably to our quality of life. Shame on you.

Alison Kastner
Northeast 13th Avenue

METRO'S RETREAT
We would like to address the article "Monroe Money" [WW, May 1, 2002] and set the record straight. The February retreat you referred to was a regularly scheduled opportunity for Metro councilors and the executive officer to discuss various issues in a more relaxed setting. Since five of the seven councilors are running for office, our attorney, Dan Cooper, took a few minutes to assist councilors in ways to keep their campaign activities separate from their Metro work. That session was not targeted toward any councilor, and certainly not at Rod Monroe.

We have worked with Rod Monroe for more than 20 years and know him to be a man of utmost integrity.

Mike Burton, Metro Executive
Carl Hosticka, Metro Presiding Officer

IT'S NOT WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE
Your May 1, 2002, article titled "Monroe's Money" not only impugns the ethics and integrity of a fine public official, but it impugns my ethics and integrity as well. Frankly, I resent it.

If your reporter had bothered to check the facts or speak with me before publication, he would have learned that the [Metro Council] vote in question, which was implied to have been a vote where [Rod] Monroe's vote made a difference, was, in fact, a unanimous 7-0 vote "resolution" to "study" certain "tiers of land" for potential urban-growth-boundary expansion. Conspicuous among those areas not included was the property belonging to my one and only client [with business before Metro].

The very short meeting I had with Councilor Monroe that day was for the sole purpose of scheduling a meeting with him. The meeting occurred solely because a Metro staffer in charge of the council desk recommended that Councilor Monroe be briefly interrupted because there was "nothing particularly important" before the council at the time.

In other words, your irresponsible article totally mischaracterized an innocuous discussion, totally unrelated to any vote; the vote ostensibly linked to the discussion was a unanimous vote in which Councilor Monroe's vote was inconsequential and my client was on the losing end of the vote.

A little more reportorial diligence would be appreciated next time.

Thane W. Tienson, P.C.
Landye Bennett Blumstein LLP
Southwest 5th Avenue

Nick Budnick responds: The article addressed the fundraising tactics of Metro Councilor Rod Monroe, who is running for Metro president, and the allegations by some that he is soliciting campaign contributions while on Metro property, which is against state law. One anecdote in the story describes a meeting Tienson had with Monroe in the councilor's office just prior to a vote Monroe cast that supported looking into the inclusion of specific pieces of land within the urban growth boundary, a decision that could greatly boost the value of included property. The story states that Tienson, who represents land developers, met with Monroe just prior to his vote and that the next day lawyers in Tienson's firm contributed to Monroe's campaign. That is true. However, as Tienson states, it is not true that land included in the study was owned by anyone Tienson represented. WW tried to contact Tienson prior to the publication of the story, but he was out of the country. Nevertheless, WW apologizes for the error.