Letters to the Editor, Week of Oct. 23

The Hawthorne Bridge Literally Elevates Bend’s Future

In response to the letter of the week from October 8th criticizing the City of Bend for investing in safer public transportation via the Hawthorne Crossing and instead suggesting the City and County divert these funds to a performing arts center and “prioritize an investment that directly benefits residents,” I’d like to point out that creating safer, more inclusive, and less car-dependent public rights-of-way is a direct and immediate investment in our community.
   Yes, the arts are important, but this author clearly has not done their homework. In 2020, Bend voters passed the Transportation Bond Measure 9-135 in which “proceeds can be used only for transportation capital construction projects and issuance costs.” And according to the ODOT project website, “The City was recently awarded $20 million from the federal Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity grant program and $5 million through state House Bill 5030.” Meaning these funds are earmarked for transportation improvements. Not art.
   Critics of the Hawthorne Crossing clearly have not experienced the joys of commuting by foot or bike through the Franklin pee tunnel or down Greenwood’s loud, narrow pedestrian path. The new bridge will not only reduce congestion for east-to-west-side travelers, but it will offer a safe alternative route for the 30% of residents who do not drive because they are children/teens, elderly, have a disability, or simply prefer not to.
   I commend the City for thinking long-term about how to elevate ALL of Bend’s residents, and for spending earmarked dollars as required.

—Meghan Teeter

Voters Should Decide

Is it me or WTF? Our county commissioners are really pushing for district mapping. Why the short deadline? I question the motives for this action, given that when the voters voted to add two additional commissioners, it had NOTHING to do with districting. As things stand right now, this is a very wasteful process. It requires a lot of volunteer time, staff time (costs) and the cost of a facilitator for something that may or may not be on the May 2026 ballot for the public to decide. Seems to me that just a simple question to voters if they want districting which should be established prior to going through all of this. The next biggest issue, is that the advisory group has old data by which to try to map districts, which they are struggling with. Again, what is the message behind this being pushed so quickly. Why not first ask if voters want this, put it on hold until the additional commissioners are sworn in and allow time to get accurate data given how much Bend has grown since 2020. I believe Mayor Kebler said it perfectly, her concern being that “if one district has too many more people than another, the voting power of the people who live there will be diluted.” Even County Clerk Dennison has expressed to “dive into accurate data would be a challenge because of the county’s growth.” To me, something stinks with this big push prior to elections. This is something that should be taken at a slower pace due to the impact for all concerned, and the new commissioners should be part of this process. I have asked the county commissioners to stop proceeding, but this falls on deaf ears, at best by two commissioners. Please pay attention to what is going on, express your concerns to the commissioners and be prepared to potentially vote no in May due to the process.

—Mary Fleischmann

One Door Closes, Another One… Doesn’t Open

Ironically, I was on my way to the library when I found out about closing of the East Bend library and re-routed to Downtown. This is a poignant example of our Library System’s misplaced priorities. East Bend was one of the system’s most popular, most used facilities. Why? The answer is easy access. Neighborhood libraries, unlike their “Central Library” cousins, offer folks a chance to visit with a short walk, bike ride or car ride to a commercial center where they can do more than one thing. Live, go to work, stop for a cup of coffee, maybe get a haircut — and yes, go to the library.

But central libraries, by contrast are central to everyone and convenient to few. Our new one, out on 27^th Street, won’t open for months, and it’s a very long drive from Redmond or LaPine. That means users of the East Bend Library (as well as the rest of us) now need to drive further and will have no access to library services on the East Side other than in cars.

With $195 million in bond money burning a hole in their pockets, the library board opted to spend about two thirds of the money on one huge building despite significant community push-back. Fortunately, a sprawling residential community is being build adjacent to the central library site. So at least in the future, those folks will have a neighborhood library, even if it is a gigantic monolith.

As a result of this central library plan, a large processing facility and expanded public space are the only broad-based benefits of their decision. The rest of the space will become an oversized Stevens Road “branch library,” while all the other key neighborhoods in Bend, except Downtown, remain without a library.

The City of Bend has an excellent plan for future development. It’s called “complete communities,” and it envisions residential and commercial neighborhoods with convenient access to jobs, businesses and services. In complete communities, people can meet most of their daily needs — such as housing, employment, education, shopping, healthcare and recreation — within a short distance by walking, cycling, public transit or a short car ride. These communities prioritize accessibility, sustainability, and inclusivity, offering a mix of housing types, transportation options, and public spaces.

The goal is to create vibrant, livable neighborhoods that support social connection, economic opportunity and environmental health while reducing reliance on cars and promoting a high quality of life for people of all ages and backgrounds. The best example we’ve got so far is Northwest Crossing, where I live. We have a great coffee shop, restaurants, a food court, hair salons, retail shops and even a small (but terrific) grocery store. Not to mention a great farmers market in the summer months.

Neighborhood libraries would be great anchors for such communities, but the library has chosen to ignore this opportunity and instead focus their funds on their “palace to the people,” as library director Todd Dunkleberg has called it. I’ve been campaigning against this plan for years, but the money’s spent and the “big, beautiful building” is near completion. So while it’s not too late to stop that mistake, we can still hope for a more constructive approach in in the future. The library board could still pay more attention to the needs and plans of the largest city in their county and work on better access to library facilities in Bend’s neighborhoods.

If, like me, you love libraries but you also like clean air, healthy living, as well as less congestion and stress on Bend’s roads, write to your Library Board and let them know you’d like a library facility in your neighborhood. They can be reached at: board@dpls.lib.or.us.

—Louis Capozzi

Support for a Performing Arts Center

I read with interest the Source opinion wondering if Central Oregon can find creative solutions to fund a center for performing arts. I, too, wonder what can be done to provide this community with a building committed to the performing arts. Bend High’s auditorium was adequate, but it’s gone. I was pleased that Tower Theatre brought the Kiev Ballet to the stage, and the artists did a beautiful job of accommodating the dance to the stage size while dancing to canned music. They exhibited an enormous amount of control, slowing or shortening the leaps and spins. I thought how sad it is for such great artists to have to restrict their movements and how wonderful it would be to watch this ballet company perform in a proper setting. If only we had one.

I see the empty Costco building and wonder if it could be retrofitted into a performing arts center. It would certainly require creativity. It has lots of parking. In Santa Clara County where I grew up, we had the Civic Auditorium. It accommodated music and boxing and whatever else came to town. The community decided to build a center for the performing arts in 1972, and it immediately became the center for the cultural community. Musicals and dramas from New York were presented as well as the symphony and local theater. It continues to this day without modification. I think we can do this as well. Bend would find it profitable in so many ways.

—Sheryl Mondt

Letter of the Week:

Thanks to everyone who submitted a letter, full of passion as always! Sheryl, as letter of the week, you can stop by the Source office for a gift card to Palate coffee. —Nic Moye, Managing Editor

—

This article appears in the Source October 23, 2025.

Join the Conversation

1 Comment

NICOLE MOORE-PERULLO says:

October 21, 2025 at 9:56 am

I want to be clear that I fully support the goal of creating safe pedestrian and bike routes connecting Bend’s east and west sides. However, what concerns me—and many others—is not the concept of a bridge, but the cost and repeated redesigns of the Hawthorne Crossing project.
While it’s true that Measure 9-135 transportation bond funds and the $25 million in state and federal grants are earmarked specifically for transportation projects, this doesn’t mean we should spend them inefficiently. These are still taxpayer-funded dollars, and responsible spending should always be part of the conversation.
According to the City of Bend’s own updates, the Hawthorne Crossing has gone through multiple rounds of redesign due to engineering challenges and community feedback. As of this year, the projected cost has increased well beyond initial estimates, and the final price tag is still uncertain. This constant redesign cycle raises legitimate concerns about fiscal oversight and project feasibility.
No one disputes the need for a safe connection between the east and west sides. But do we truly need an elaborate “signature” bridge when a simpler, functional pedestrian overpass—or even other safe crossings—could achieve the same goal at a fraction of the cost? Investing in safety does not require extravagance.
Yes, funds are earmarked for transportation, but fiscal responsibility within that category still matters. The city should explore alternative, cost-effective designs that prioritize safety and accessibility over aesthetics and grandeur. Bend residents deserve solutions that are both practical and sustainable—not projects that grow in price every few months.