JDH Letter: City Council should maintain $6 million in reserve

Letter submitted to the Corvallis Gazette-Times on 6/30/2010 by John H. Detweiler - As I observed in a previous letter, we have a budget crisis. Expenses are up, revenues are down, and our reserves of all operating property tax funds combined are disappearing. At the very least, the next City Council must stop the drop in reserves by reducing spending before our reserves are gone.

One of our expenditures is "transfers out". Transfers include funding for capital projects as defined in the Capital Improvement Program (CIP). Another expenditure is departmental "special projects". These are one-time expenditures, actual projects, new equipment, or replacements for worn out equipment. However no matter how equipment is funded, we need to consider stretching out or suspending such expenditures. We must also be careful that we don't acquire improvements or equipment with future high operating and maintenance costs.

The Council should make plans to maintain enough reserves so there is enough of a buffer for the Council to react to unanticipated unfavorable events before running out of money. In my opinion, our reserve target should be $6 million because, looking at the rate of decrease in revenues minus expenses, the Council should be able to get its act together in sufficient time to avoid running out of money. Anytime the reserve is less than $6 million, we should reduce expenses and stretch out investments to build the reserve to more than $6 million. Anytime the reserve is more than $6 million, we could fund more services. Read More......

LETTER: (Council punts on 2010-11 budget)

LETTER TO THE EDITOR (Submitted to the Corvallis Gazette-Times, 2/17/2010 by John H. Detweiler) - In the February 17th Gazette-Times we were treated to an above-the-fold article telling us that the Corvallis City Council is punting on the 2010-11 budget. The Council is going to proceed with programs such as community sustainability and give proportional cuts to police and fire. ∴ Sooner or later, Corvallis is going to have to establish priorities and make choices. This will not be a pleasant experience; but there is no other choice. The alternatives are for us to not fund basic services (e.g. police and fire) or for all of us to ride our own hobbyhorses all the way to bankruptcy. ∴ The purpose of local government is to provide quality services to the most people possible with the money that is available.

To establish priorities, we need to know how often citizens use the services provided and what their perceptions are of the relative quality of these services. I estimated service usage and relative perceptions of quality with the raw data collected for the 2009 Corvallis Citizens Attitude Survey. My analysis can be found at http://www.peak.org/~detweij.

Services that are used more often should receive more funds. Tax money should flow to the services that are used the most often by the most people where the quality can be improved and users cannot be identified in a cost effective manner. Where the users can be cost effectively identified, user fees should be imposed to recoup the cost of these services.

To continue on our present path is foolhardy.

John H. Detweiler Read More......

Profound words to share with Congress

(Hat tip: Stella Guenther via email) Here's a short profound paragraph that might make a good letter/email to blitz Congress with:

"You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it." --Adrian Rogers, 1931-2005

Read More......

JHD Letter: (Untitled regarding Measures 66 & 67)

SUBMITTED TO: CORVALLIS GAZETTE-TIMES/LETTERS by John Detweiler - We are about to vote on raising taxes on corporations and the rich. As I said on this page on November 30th, the people who will have to pay the increased taxes make economic decisions in their best interests as they see them. Taxes have been raised in other places at other times creating an incentive for people to take action to reduce the effects of the increased taxes. People living in the Boston area have been moving to New Hampshire for years to avoid Massachusetts' taxes. People retiring in New York move to places like Texas for lower taxes -- and better weather. California has been losing business to Nevada and Arizona for years because of high taxes. People are moving out of Maryland to avoid the recently imposed millionaires tax. The results will be the same in Oregon.

Responsible citizens know they must live within their means. They prioritize their needs and wants over the long run and stop spending when they run out of money. Oregon can't seem to act responsibly. It has been known for many years that Oregon's revenues fluctuate with the business cycle. The Legislature needs to spend less in good times, putting serious money into the rainy-day-fund, so there is money for the bad times.

John H. Detweiler (www.peak.org/~detweij)
Corvallis Read More......

Letter: Top brass, Obama march to wrong drum on war policy, military rules

CORVALLIS GAZETTE-TIMES/LETTERS 12/29/2009 by Ken Real - "As a retired military member, I am truly dissatisfied by the current administration and the military commanders. ∴ We are sending more troops to Afghanistan as well as implementing new rules and requirements that hinder our troops' ability to win. ∴ Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal has decided to place unrealistic rules of engagement that include no night or surprise searches. ∴ Villagers are to be warned prior to searches; U.S. soldiers may not fire at insurgents unless they are preparing to fire first, and troops can fire on insurgents only if they catch them placing an improvised explosive device, but not if insurgents walk away from where the explosives are, to name just a few. ∴ Maj. Gen. Tony Cucolo has informed all military members in theater that if they get pregnant, they will be court marshaled. OK, let's send young men and women to a far-off land to fight and die, and heaven forbid they fall in love and have sex. ∴ I have a recommendation to both generals: STOP playing with the lives of our service members for your own personal gain. Either let them do their jobs, or bring them home. ∴ It also is apparent that President Obama does not have the strength to make a hard decision. He needs to fight the wars to win, or end the wars now! Those are the only two options that can bring success. The American people are tired of new plans that don't work as we watch our sons and daughters die!"

Ken Real
Adair Village Read More......

Letter: Merkley's addition to health care slapped burden on small builders

CORVALLIS GAZETTE-TIMES/LETTERS, 12/29/2009 by Jean Nelson - "I'm shocked! In the midst of high unemployment and disappearing jobs, U.S. Sen. Jeff Merkley of Oregon slipped another killer into Obamacare. ∴ Inserted into the "health care" bill as a "manager's amendment," so that there was no discussion and no vote, Sen. Merkley added a requirement that construction companies with more than five employees will be required to offer health insurance. ∴ Small construction companies in Oregon and in the nation will be devastated by this requirement. If this bill becomes law, every other industry with more than 50 employees must provide health insurance. ∴ Why were small construction companies singled out? That is a question that needs to be asked of Sen. Merkley. It appears to be another one of the payoffs that are so rampant throughout the health care bill. ∴ Please call Sen. Merkley's district office at 503-326-3386 and insist that this provision be removed."

Jean Nelson
Corvallis Read More......

Letter: Sen. Wyden is slippery as a greased pig on health care reform

CORVALLIS GAZETTE-TIMES/LETTERS, 10/16/2009 by Jean Nelson - Holding Sen. Ron Wyden responsible for his vote is like trying to hold on to a greased pig at a carnival booth. Wyden is a member of the powerful Senate Finance Committee, and he voted Wednesday (Oct. 14) in favor of health care legislation that he has sharply criticized for weeks.

After Wyden's vote, he made a carefully scripted statement that basically said, "I'm for it, but I'm against it," trying not to be responsible for his decision.

Wyden's vote put his stamp of approval on a huge tax increase that limits the deductibility of medical expenses on income taxes. He voted to tax the sick by raising the threshold for deducting medical expenses from 7.5 percent to 10 percent of one's Adjusted Gross Income as long as the taxpayer is under 65.

Moving according to a pre-arranged plan, now Harry Reid is merging all the health care bills behind closed doors. In a rush to push their version of "health care reform" through Congress, Democrats are ignoring surveys that say that the public wants to take their time and work the bugs out of any changes.

The Senate Finance Committee and the House Tri-Committee are estimating a price tag of around a mere $1 trillion, give or take a few billion dollars for their versions of health care reform. Honest interpretation shows all the bills are fatally flawed and will bring us high costs, government takeover, huge tax increases, major unfunded expansions in Medicaid and major cuts to Medicare.

Jean Nelson, Corvallis

(See 'COMMENTS' to this article in the G-T) Read More......

Letter: Government's role in health care should be minor one (Oct. 14)

CORVALLIS GAZETTE-TIMES (Letters), 10/14/2009 by Jeff Limón - Thank you, Robert G. Gourley, for your Oct. 8 letter, "Forget hoopla to date, calm down, and let's reform health care." ∴ The issue does not deal with whether or not health care should be reformed. The matter before us is the precise nature of that reform. To me, the crux of the biscuit is whether or not government should increase or decrease its involvement in the health care system. ∴ There are places, such as Pendleton, where if you are a Medicare patient, you may have to drive to as far as Walla Walla, Wash., to find a doctor that accepts Medicare. So, the notion of expanding the government's role in health care seems like "OK, let's take a system that doesn't work, and make it bigger!"

As it pertains to "cooler heads prevailing":

It's difficult to take that statement seriously, especially given President Obama's recent passing out of lab coats to those who purported themselves to be doctors on the White House lawn. Hey, I have a lab coat: Can I pass myself off as a doctor?

Several years ago, an engineer friend of mine decided that he didn't like engineering anymore. He had the choice to become either a doctor, or a lawyer. However, the threat of a government-run health care system dissuaded him from medical school. Instead, he went to law school. (He's brilliant, and completed a three-year program in two years.)

Now, you tell me: Does the country need one more lawyer, or one more doctor?

Jeff Limon, Corvallis Read More......

Letter: ‘Mad' doctors don't inspire confidence in their stance

CORVALLIS GAZETTE-TIMES/OPINION,9/10/2009 by Jean Nelson - Mad (mad) n. - adj. 1. mentally disturbed or deranged; insane; demented. 2. enraged or irritated; angry. 6. extremely foolish or unwise; imprudent; irrational. Webster's Dictionary (1989). ∴ "Mad" M.D.s? The terminology leaves much to be desired. ∴ We need people who will think through all sides of the health-care issue. ∴ Here are a few problems:

• Health care bills before Congress would drastically increase government control of our economy and our lives! The health-care industry is worth $2.5 trillion a year.
• More than 88 million Americans will lose their private insurance if a government competitor is created. The "government option" would quickly become the only option. (Lewin study.)
• Businesses will be charged $40 to $50 billion a year, resulting in millions of people losing their jobs.
• Congressional Budget Office analysis shows that the plans being proposed won't lower costs, but instead will raise them by $239 billion. HR 3200 creates 53 new programs, offices and bureaucracies.
• Extending coverage to 50 million new people - without new doctors or nurses or equipment or hospitals - will create a scarcity that will lead to rationing, to the disadvantage of those over 65.
• The American people are afraid of current massive government spending with its huge debt. Our nation pays billions in interest each year. A radical and expensive transformation during a major recession, funded by a huge budget deficit, is unwise!

We DO need to fix America's health system, but not by destroying America. Solutions must consider our country's present situation.

Jean Nelson, Corvallis Read More......