Author: North Coast BBQ

Here is a quote from the Explanatory Statement (pg 61 of the Voter’s Pamphlet):
“With ranked choice voting, voters MAY rank candidates for office in order of preference. Voters MAY choose to rank multiple candidate or ONLY ONE CANDIDATE for each office, as well as write-in candidate(s).” Capitals are my emphasis.

I counted 11 Arguments in Opposition that stated a voter must rank all candidates, which according to the above quote is obviously not true.

Since the Explanatory Statement is very clear, I have to believe that the authors deliberately lied. And if they lied about something so obvious, what else might they be lying about?

I for one have had ENOUGH of lying; of people saying anything they want, repeatedly, to get you to believe their lies. It’s a page out of Hitler’s play book.

Please read the Voter’s Pamphlet CAREFULLY and VOTE.

Full disclosure—I haven’t decided yet how I will vote on Measure 117. In theory it sounds good and that it would give independent candidates a better chance of winning which I support. I do have some concerns about this particular process—it is only for some candidates, it is confusing and it will probably be costly monetarily.

Here are quotes from those in opposition.
“RCV (ranked choice voting) disenfranchises voters. Voters must rank ALL candidates” Karen Schmidlin page 79. Capitals are hers.

“The voters want to make their choices and not be forced into ranking or voting for ALL candidates, including the people they do NOT want to vote for.” John F Woods pages 80-81. Capitals are his.

“RCV lays the foundation for ballots to NOT be counted. RCV requires every candidate to be ranked. If a voter fails to rank a candidate the entire ballot is discarded.” Suni B Danforth page 81. Capital are theirs. “Every” and “entire ballot is discarded” were underlined.

“RCV will: Force you to select candidates you don’t support.” Mary Chalkiopoulos page 82 (in bold and underlined.)

“It can be confusing when voters must rank multiple candidates instead of just choosing the one they want.” Elaine M Woods pages 82 and 83.

“If there is a slate of five candidates, you must rank them 1 to 5. If you want to only vote for one of the candidates and, consequently, not rank the other four, you ballot will be thrown out.” Lynn K Harris page 83

“RCV forces you to rank all candidates even if you do not want to vote for them.” Jennifer Adishian pages 84 and 85.

“Measure 117 makes it HARDER to VOTE. First, it will take longer to fill out a ballot because every candidate in a race must be ranked—you cannot just pick your favorite candidate and move on. Second, because each candidate must be ranked, from most favorite to least favorite, many more mistakes can be made.” Eric W Reschke, Werner For Oregon pages 86 and 87. Capitals are his.

“The biggest problem with RCV is that is FORCES you to rank ALL candidates, including the people you do NOT want to vote for.” Kim Rice. Page 89. Capitals are theirs.

“With RCV, you need to rank everyone running for each race.” Patty DeBois page 89.

“In rank choice voting, voters rank candidates for an office from first to last.” Darlene Karner page 90.

“RCV requires voters to rank candidates in order of preference.” Mary Loseke page 93

Barbara McLaughlin

Measure 29-179 will only impact when we get billed for water–if it passes we’ll be billed monthly, if it fails we’ll be billed quarterly. The $ amount that we are charged for water we use will not change regardless of the vote.

Tom Campbell and Jerry Spegman are running unopposed for [their current] open city council positions. Kathryn Stock is running unopposed for [her current] position of Mayor.

All three of these candidates are excellent choices as our representatives. They have proven their value by representing us ably, with wisdom, humor and hard work. We are lucky to have such high-caliber volunteers. Integrity matters.

Please vote:

YES on Measure 29-179

And big YESSES:

Tom Campbell
Jerry Spegman
Kathryn Stock

Michael’s surviving relatives include his wife Tela Skinner, his sons Jaya and Taurin Skinner-Maginnis, his daughters-in-love, Whitney Handrich and Susa Lynne, his sister-in-law Shirley Murray; nephews Bill Maginnis and family, Chris Murray and family; nieces Jennifer Hooley and family, MaryAnne Gates and family. Michael’s parents (Charles and Thelma Maginnis) and both brothers (James Murray and David Maginnis) preceded him in death. Michael’s extended family also included in-laws Rosemary and Roger Wolfin of Michigan, and Carolyn and Mike Stevens of Arizona.

Michael also wished to acknowledge his many friends, who are too numerous to list. He and Tela were blessed by their inclusion in the community of Manzanita and surrounding area and by their many friends from the Portland area and beyond.

Prior to moving to the Manzanita area full-time in 2008, Michael and Tela raised their sons in West Linn, Oregon. Michael worked in wholesale lumber for most of his career, retiring in January of 2008.

With the help of Tela’s design skills, Michael was able to build a home near the golf course in Manzanita which they moved into immediately after his retirement. A few years later, when a beautiful lot became available in Neahkahnie, they were again able to team up and build their “final resting place” overlooking the ocean.

Michael played many rounds of golf with the local gang of regulars at the Manzanita Links. Two highlights from his years of hacking away: visiting Scotland for a golf junket with both brothers and other relatives and friends, and a hole-in-one on Manzanita’s hole number three.

After retiring, Michael discovered a new passion in music, fostered by a class at NCRD called Playing Well With Others, where he met new friends in the area. Playing guitar and singing became a fun outlet for him and he played in a few local bands: Rhythm Method, The Ferrets, and Stay Tuned.

Michael also became involved with several local non-profits including the Lower Nehalem Community Trust, the Hoffman Center for the Arts, and served on the board and as president at both CARTM and the Pine Grove Community Center.

Michael and Tela were able to travel a bit over the years with Kauai being a favored vacation spot. They also enjoyed visiting Victoria, BC, and other local driving destinations.

The love Michael received from Tela, Jaya and his partner Whitney Handrich, and Taurin and his wife Susa Lynne, was a special blessing to him.

To Michael, the listing of the “facts” of his life were not as important to him as were the elements of his character as he moved through life. By nature introverted and introspective, he often reflected on how his conduct impacted others. He strove to improve and grow spiritually and to show kindness to all. He felt blessed with an abundance of love from family and community.

He also had a lively sense of humor and enjoyed a good laugh with friends.

In lieu of flowers, any contributions to the Pine Grove Community Center in Manzanita would make Michael happy. A celebration of his life will be announced later.

Page 4 of the presented Study claimed that Resolution 23-19 enacted monthly water billings. A review of the July 5th meeting minutes confirms that just prior to the vote to approve this Resolution, citizens were told that “Billing will remain quarterly”.

Minutes from a later February 14, 2024 Workshop showed a different explanation of what we had been told 7 months earlier stating that when the July Resolution was passed, “the City also switched to monthly water billing”. This directly contradicts the July 5th statement.

The Council refuses to acknowledge and take responsibility that it violated its own Ordinance regarding when water bills are to be submitted to customers for payment. The City collected monthly water fees with the new tier charges for 7 months before finally passing the Ordinance that authorized both reading meters monthly and billing customers monthly rather than quarterly as the City promised when they passed Resolution 23-19.

In a March 2023 Workshop, the City Manager produced a document on City Hall financing that stated in part “Overnight visitors who pay TLT (Transient Lodging Tax) pay for pretty much all of the City’s Services… AND infrastructure.” The City Manager even emphasized her statement to convince citizens that TLT revenues are used to fund water Infrastructure.

When asked at the September Workshop if TLT revenue in the General Fund had been considered as a funding option in the quarterly rate analysis, the City Manager responded “we didn’t even consider that”. She then confused the issue even further by suggesting that using TLT revenue would not be responsible budgeting, could raise red flags with the Auditors or even jeopardize the Water Operating Fund’s status as an Enterprise Fund.

Confirmation that the City Manager’s comments were misleading is confirmed by the following: “There are no restrictions on moving money between the General Fund and an Enterprise Fund under local Budget Law” Scott Smith, Operations and Policy Analyst, Oregon Department of Revenue.

A year ago the City told us that visitors through TLT revenue pay for water infrastructure. When given the opportunity to make good on that claim and transfer a small portion of those funds from the General Fund to help pay for the costs to continue to provide residents with 4,000 gallons of water each month and keep rates affordable for families and seniors of modest means in our community, we are told that such use is now beyond consideration.

The tens of thousands of visitors that come to Manzanita each year are a substantial class of water customers that far exceeds our resident water customer population. The main difference is that residents get a monthly water bill to pay for water system operation, maintenance and infrastructure improvements. The City collects TLT revenue from visitor water customers and despite being told it is used to fund water Infrastructure, not a single dollar gets transferred out of the General Fund for this purpose.

Residents under the new monthly billing schedule are told that we must conserve water so visitors do not have to be bothered with such matters. If you are a resident using 4,000 gallons of water a month in the summer and the STR next door uses 7,000 gallons, the City wants you to be satisfied that the extra $30 water bill paid by the STR owner for each of those 4 summer months is a fair contribution by those visitors.

The City Budget confirms that Annual Water Utility Billing costs for the City two years ago under quarterly billing were $14,762. This year under proposed monthly billing those same costs are now $50,000. These costs do not include the additional staff time to now process monthly billings. The City admits that it takes more staff time to process monthly billings but will not tell us just how much this costs. Was the consultant given the opportunity to consider these increased billing and staff costs required by monthly billing in his quarterly rate analysis?

I am confident that both part time and full time residents would support the use of TLT revenue to assist the Water Utility Fund as a simple solution to secure meaningful financial support from visitors for their usage, provide residents with the means to obtain 4,000 gallons of water per month as a base allotment and deliver needed funding for water infrastructure projects.

Now that the reasons not to use TLT revenue to benefit residents in this matter have been eliminated, what new explanations will the City come up with? Why is our Council and City Manager so opposed to this solution that they will not even allow their consultant to provide us with this as an option for community discussion?

This process has been marked by mistakes, misleading statements, ignoring requirements in a City Ordinance and lack of interest in crafting a solution that works best for residents. The Council will resume their discussion on this matter this Wednesday at 2 pm in a workshop session.

Manzanita voters are being solicited by Mayor Stock and Councilors Spegman and Campbell to return them to Council for another term. I would encourage voters to carefully evaluate the positions of each of these individuals on this decision and ask yourself if they are representing your best interests and have earned your vote on November 5th.
Randy Kugler

Even though I live in Nehalem in terms of where my house is and for whom I can vote, I went to the Wheeler Candidates Forum at NCRD because I consider that I live in the entire Nehalem Bay community, which includes all three towns of Wheeler, Nehalem and Manzanita. I listened carefully to what each candidate had to say.

Mary Leverette’s work history includes an almost 30-year career in government service for the State of Oregon and the City of Portland. I believe she understands the mechanics of city government, and will bring experience to the Wheeler City Council.

I find her to be a person who is a fair-minded voice of reason. I believe she is devoted to serving her community, wants to help find solutions that will serve Wheeler long term, and is committed to Wheeler’s future.

She has been an organizer for the community of Wheeler, having worked in emergency preparedness and in coordinating the Wheeler Clean-Up Day for three years. She has attended nearly every Wheeler city council session for the past two years. This shows a keen interest in Wheeler’s well-being.

She tells us she is organized, fair-minded and practical. I believe her.

While it is not a specific qualification for being a city councilor, it speaks to me that she was a hospice volunteer for over fourteen years. Clearly, she is a caring person.

If I lived in Wheeler, Mary Leverette would get my vote. I believe she will be an effective city councilor.

om peace namaste

lucy brook