Starting next season, Mt. Bachelor will no longer have a season locker room. There are patrons that have had a locker there for over two decades. It will especially hurt older skiers who ride the bus to the mountain, and will no longer have a place to keep their things. The mountain will have a ski check and day lockers. But that will be upstairs at the Gateway building, where there is no bathroom facility. Once again, Mt. Bachelor is putting profit ahead of the needs and desires of locals.
While words like "shit" don't offend me, it's still disappointing that you use the word in your articles because then I can't share your paper with the residents at my place of work. I know the Source is the "party-paper" of Bend, but don't you know you can still be rad without using "shit" in your stories? You could reach more people. Just sayin'.
The climbers who made the first ascent on Moose's Tooth can probably be excused for their lack of punctuation skills, but I'm not so sure about the editor of this paper. Your "correction" puts the apostrophe after the 's', which makes no sense whatsoever. Mooses' ? Really?
New Editor. Great piece. Looking forward to more news features from The Source. Great!
Mentally picture this scenario: In a retirement community, an elderly couple buys a home by means of a bank loan. After their final installment payment, the bank gives TOTAL OWNERSHIP to the park owner. Sounds bizarre? That scenario is nevertheless analogous to the construction and ownership of the Bend Senior Center.
Who paid for the land on which the Center was built? Not Bend Park & Rec. That land was DONATED by Deschutes County for the Bend Senior Center. Who paid the construction costs of the center? Not Bend Park & Rec. Even before construction began, the United Senior Citizens of Bend paid the costs of architect fees and for an easement through private property of utilities to the center.
Who paid the costs of constructing the building? Not Bend Park & Rec. Construction costs of the building were billed to USCB. And USCB, not Bend Park & Rec., paid those bills of more than $900,000. The final billing to USCB, for overrun costs, was $150,000.
After construction was completed, Bend City Council, which owned the building (as trustee) during construction, gave TOTAL OWNERSHIP to Bend Park and Rec. And the Bend City Council has ignored multiple requests to explain how and why it felt justified to do so, and thus leaving USCB without even a PORTION of ownership or any recompense whatsoever.
Adding expenditures AFTER construction—such as for equipping the library, enhancing the kitchen, furnishing the lobby, etc.—USCB's investments in Bend Senior Center exceeded a million dollars. So USCB's claim for reinforcement is LESS THAN THE TOTAL of its investments.
Bend Park & Rec. has taken the position that USCB's claim should be resolved only in a court of law. That would be an extremely lopsided advantage for Bend Park & Rec., with its very DEEP pockets filled by 10 percent of all property taxes, in contrast to the shallow pockets of USCB. Furthermore, IRONICALLY, a portion of Bend Park & Rec.'s legal costs would be paid for by the property taxpaying members of USCB.
So now the Source is advocating illegal activities in regard to jumping off the Columbia Bridge. Telling people to find the Xs carved into the wooden railing and "pencil dive" into the river? Is the Source going to pay the medical bills for the kid who breaks their neck in the shallow river. I could really care less who jumps from the bridge, but is the Source also going to pay the city back for the materials and manpower it took for them to replace the wooden railings where the X's were carved after reading this article...yes they replaced them with taxpayer money. Thanks, Brianna Brey, can the city just send you a bill for services?
It should be mentioned that at least $100,000 in taxes have gone into a process that simply rehashes the options that anyone could have foreseen before this money was spent. A better use of the money would have been to detail the cost and implications of each option and THEN survey the public with (this time) a scientific poll that would give statistically valid results. Consultant overkill comes at a heavy price. After a hundred grand we are exactly back where we started!
No Bend local should ever drive to Phil's trailhead.
An argument often repeated by National Rifle Association extremists is that added gun control measures would not have prohibited the horrific Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre. They may not have prohibited it, but if the deranged killer had used a less efficient killing machine, he probably would not have killed so many, so quickly. Is not the life of a single precious 6-year-old child worth restricting the number of bullets that weapons can hold before reloading? One simply does not need a 20-30-or 50-bullet magazine to protect one's home, so why are they legal and available for the occasional maniac to find and use? Flame throwers and grenade launchers are illegal, so why not these huge clips? They were invented for wars, not home defense!
NRA extremists also claim that a universal background check is unnecessary for law-abiding citizens to hassle with, and would be an impingement upon their right to privacy. Is that because they actually fear that a Big Brother government would use such checks to oppress law-abiding citizens while allowing criminals and psychopaths free rein because they will find ways to avoid them? The arguments against any prohibition on high-efficiency killing machines and a universal background check smack of hysterical paranoia.
Contrary to the hysterical claims of the NRA, the sky will not fall if magazines are limited to 10 bullets or background checks are required for all gun purchases. The sky will fall, however, if millions more humans own millions more high-efficiency killing machines. After all, today's crowded planet is not the Old West of a few thousand settlers scattered about.
How can exponential growth of human and gun populations possibly result in a sustainable world civilization and livable biosphere? Humans can send spacecraft to other planets and mass produce tiny hand-held devices—smart phones—that can access all human knowledge from almost anywhere on the planet, but they cannot build a civilization where people feel safe from one another. Humans have done some clever things, but when it comes to constructing a sustainable future for our species and many others, we are failing miserably. NRA-inflamed hysteria over the slightest gun control legislation is one garish demonstration of this suicidal rush to failure. Beware the egocentric, competitive, mistake-prone, argumentative, paranoid, violent mutant-mind monkeys and their high-efficiency killing machines!