BILL NAITO WAS AN AMERICAN
In his article about the Naito families ["Naito Divided," WW, July 29, 1998], Nigel Jaquiss says of Bill Naito's involvement in the Japanese American Historical Plaza: "...his leadership of the plaza effort marked a reconciliation with his roots." Perhaps that is so.But the statement overlooks what I believe was at the heart of Bill's involvement in the Plaza, and to which one of the stones in the Plaza speaks when it says: "Sure, I go to the school same as you. I'm an American." As another stone proclaims, it is a "Bill of Rights Memorial."
For Bill, that surely is what the Plaza is all about. It is about being an American. Where his father was born was only incidental.
Robert Weiss
Southwest 10th AvenueMAKING WAVES
In regards to your "Water Hazards" story ["500 Words," WW, Aug. 5, 1998]. It's one thing to have a negative opinion on Personal Water Craft. It's quite another to publish that opinion when it is not based on facts. Please try to make an educated opinion by doing a little research before you publish your ignorance for all to see. Don't just take one person's (or one tree-hugger group's) word on it. Do a little research, and get both sides of the story. You may want to try riding a Personal Watercraft to find out what it's like. Are there really 13,000 people hell-bent on polluting the river? PWC (or even boats with two-stroke motors) are not a major contributor to water pollution. But please, don't take my word for it. Find out on your own. You really owe it to yourself, and your readers.David Groll
Dallas, TexasA BAD SIGN...
The City Club of Portland's Billboard Regulation Committee opposes AK Media/Northwest's recent request for 72 billboard "adjustments" ["Rogue of the Week," WW, Aug 5, 1998]. The "adjustments" would allow larger, taller, and new billboard structures all over Portland--all in violation of the City's Sign Code. The City Club has carefully studied the impacts of billboards and large signs and has three times adopted positions that support the limitation of billboards in Portland. The Committee strongly urges the City Council to hold firm and not allow further visual degradation of our streets and neighborhoods by large, out-of-scale signs.Rather than allowing the development of new and larger billboards in Portland, the City Council should move quickly to create an amortization program that would remove, or bring into compliance with the Sign Code, the over 800 non-conforming billboards that already line our streets.
The City Council should also take action to reign in the recent proliferation of large advertising wall signs being painted on the sides of buildings. Many of these very large signs greatly exceed the size limits in the Sign Code and are sometimes accompanied by extensive lighting systems that violate other City ordinances.
Thank you for continuing to focus public attention on the negative impacts of large, out-of-scale signs in Portland.
Kurt Wehbring, Chair
City Club of Portland Billboard
Regulation CommitteeTHE SHOCKING TRUTH?
Your cover story ["Zapped," WW, Aug. 5, 1998] on restructuring Oregon's electricity market really missed the mark in trying to make the story simple. I'd like to clear up a few of the mistakes or myths in the article.Myth: "Energy deregulation is on the table in Oregon because of the Enron Corporation."
Reality: The issue is on the table because industrial and commercial electricity customers are convinced Oregon will benefit from choice, just as customers have benefited when other industries deregulated. While Enron/PGE claims to be the biggest proponent of competition nationally, the company in Oregon has acted like a monopoly incumbent by working for rules that will allow them to dominate the market after deregulation. In 1997, Enron/PGE helped kill consumer choice legislation that was backed by consumers. Now it appears the company's interest in competition is overshadowed in Oregon by a greater desire to retain a hold on key market segments and continue to stick customers over the long term with costs from the shut-down Trojan Nuclear Plant.
Myth: " Portland's electricity rates are at least 100 percent cheaper than the rest of the country's."
Reality: It's the argument of the status quo that Oregon's electricity rates are low,but the U.S. Department of Energy reports they are higher, on average, than the rates in Washington, Idaho, Montana and Wyoming. Oregon consumers will save just like in other states as competition replaces the waste of monopoly.
Myth: "The big loser will be our environment."
Reality: Right now, in a regulated system, the region's investments in renewable energy projects and conservation are declining. No utility offers a green power choice to consumers. Environmentalists have embraced consumer choice because they realize that, in a deregulated market, energy service providers will offer green options to customers who want them.
Don't over-complicate it. It is Oregon consumers who really want the ability to choose their electricity provider and there are many companies, including PG&E Energy Services, that want to serve them.
Sandra McDonough, Vice President of Corporate Relations
PG&E Gas Transmission-NorthwestCONSERVATIVES FOR FREEDOM
Kudos to Patty Wentz--and Willamette Week--for an articulate and balanced story on Measure 67 ["Dope with Dignity," WW, Aug. 12, 1998]. It will certainly be interesting to see how the campaign plays out.If the past is any prologue, other states' experiences to date with similar initiatives show us that political conservatives will feature prominently in the No on 67 campaign. Why is this important? Because each wave of contemporary conservatism, from Barry Goldwater's to Ronald Reagan's to Newt Gingrich's, has made limiting the powers of government its mantra.
If this is the case, why in California, Arizona, and Washington have so many of these men's followers chosen to oppose measures similar to Measure 67 that would enhance the rights of citizens as against the powers assumed by what they might otherwise term the Leviathan State? Today, we are supposed to believe that "government interference in the health-care system" has become a national bogeyman. So shouldn't the folks (such as Dr. Cornelia Taylor, who was mentioned in your article) who brought us Harry and Louise argue in favor of a vote that would help shield doctors and their patients from threats of fines, forfeiture, and prison?
I urge every conservative in Oregon to avoid the temptations of hypocrisy, to stand by their defenses of freedom in other instances, and to join the rest of us who support Measure 67.
Joseph Bear Wilner
Southeast Mulberry Avenue
originally published August 19, 1998