Port Of Astoria Commissioners raised the question in their meeting Tuesday night.
Where does all the money flowing into the Department of State Lands from Clatsop County actually go? Well..it's supposed to go into the common school fund and it's a nice chunk of cash. Ballpark estimates would place the number at around a million
dollars over the last couple of years alone. Clatsop County schools totaled about $220,000 in payments from the common school fund for 2011. For Astoria schools that means just a little over $84,000.
I'll let you chew on that for a minute.
The Department of State Lands is the administrative arm of the State Land Board which, since it's inception, is constitutionally composed of the Governor, the State Treasurer and the Secretary of State. The Department is responsible for the collection of fees for things like use of submerged and submersible lands, execution and collection of lease agreements..etc on any lands owned by the State Of Oregon. If a person dies and leaves no will behind then the estate goes to this department. If unclaimed property pops up then this department holds it. So there is a lot of money flowing into this department all the time.
The last published audit of the Department of State Lands in March of 2010 indicated that they were doing a very poor job of keeping track of their money. They had no controls in place, in fact the Director was unaware of some of the basic accounting practices they need to have in place.
The method of disbursing common school funds is a bit of a mystery and I suspect it is based on some method best described as the "dart board" technique shrouded in methodology far too complicated for the common person to understand. My suggestion is schools should make every effort to keep the Governor happy. Flowers would be nice.
I'm sure someone out there has the extra time on their hands to fully research this matter. I know this has caught the Port's attention and they are looking into just how much coastal communities are pouring into this department. It takes months to get the numbers so as that moves along I'll pass it on to you.
Comments expressed
February 16, 2011
February 14, 2011
Good idea
Oregon State lawmakers may get the opportunity to make changes to the state helmet laws. As it stands the law requires all those who ride motorcycles to wear an approved helmet. The law has been in effect for many years and every year motorcyclists bring some version of this bill forward to eliminate the requirement. This latest attempt would require those under 21 years old to wear a helmet and eliminate the requirement for those who should be older and wiser.
Those who seek the wind in their hair and the freedom of going helmet less argue that helmets cause accidents because they limit vision. I don't suppose any of those accidents had something more to do with speed and handling skill. Nonetheless, I believe that people who are of age should be encouraged to take responsibility for themselves and the State should work to withdraw or alter laws like these that limit personal freedom of choice. Seatbelts next.
Those who seek the wind in their hair and the freedom of going helmet less argue that helmets cause accidents because they limit vision. I don't suppose any of those accidents had something more to do with speed and handling skill. Nonetheless, I believe that people who are of age should be encouraged to take responsibility for themselves and the State should work to withdraw or alter laws like these that limit personal freedom of choice. Seatbelts next.
February 10, 2011
Why It's Important
It might seem to some listeners that we spend entirely too much time covering LNG issues on the radio. I can understand that. We're all getting a little tired of it. I was very glad to see the county commission decide to hold a limited hearing in March to go over the consolidated land use application for the Oregon Pipeline LLC project. Even the major opponent stated there has been more than enough evidence gathered and sees no reason to gather more.
The issue that I didn't see coming was this bias challenge that Oregon Pipeline filed with the county this week. It's really the most obvious move they could make. The company claims that LNG was the key issue that swept the standing commissioners out the door and brought three fresh faces on board the commission. Starting with that supposition the company says there was a concerted effort to convince the previous board to delay making a decision on the consolidated application and let the new commissioners and hold-overs Dirk Rohne and Patricia Roberts make the decision. The company says that because Huhtala had direct connections to Riverkeeper and the Columbia River Business Alliance he should recuse himself now. The company claims that Birkby and Lee campaigned on the strength of their anti-LNG stance and should recuse as well.
I may not agree with the tactics used by Riverkeeper supporters (they are just plain rude) and I may not agree with those who claim science fiction is fact but I do respect how these commissioners handled this challenge publicly in answering each question in the challenge in open session. They didn't have to do that.
Now we come to the important part. Having gone on the record as having no bias against the Oregon Pipeline LLC project they really need to make absolutely sure they "walk the walk", otherwise they could face a state ethics investigation. Serious stuff. It would help if the commissioners would make public the reason for bringing the land use application back for review in the nick of time. They won't do that so I'm afraid there will always be a question as to motivation.
The issue that I didn't see coming was this bias challenge that Oregon Pipeline filed with the county this week. It's really the most obvious move they could make. The company claims that LNG was the key issue that swept the standing commissioners out the door and brought three fresh faces on board the commission. Starting with that supposition the company says there was a concerted effort to convince the previous board to delay making a decision on the consolidated application and let the new commissioners and hold-overs Dirk Rohne and Patricia Roberts make the decision. The company says that because Huhtala had direct connections to Riverkeeper and the Columbia River Business Alliance he should recuse himself now. The company claims that Birkby and Lee campaigned on the strength of their anti-LNG stance and should recuse as well.
I may not agree with the tactics used by Riverkeeper supporters (they are just plain rude) and I may not agree with those who claim science fiction is fact but I do respect how these commissioners handled this challenge publicly in answering each question in the challenge in open session. They didn't have to do that.
Now we come to the important part. Having gone on the record as having no bias against the Oregon Pipeline LLC project they really need to make absolutely sure they "walk the walk", otherwise they could face a state ethics investigation. Serious stuff. It would help if the commissioners would make public the reason for bringing the land use application back for review in the nick of time. They won't do that so I'm afraid there will always be a question as to motivation.
February 08, 2011
A House Bill That Ticks off Everyone
House bill 3025.
Sponsored by Representative Debbie Boone at the request of District Attorney Josh Marquis and apparently the topic of Marquis' appearance before the Governor's Advisory Committee
on DUII this Friday.
The bill changes the powers of the District Attorneys in Oregon so that they may take control of the investigation and prosecution of any misdemeanor committed in the county served by the District Attorney.
After several attempts to convince the Astoria City Council to turn over the misdemeanor DUII's currently handled in municipal court to the Circuit Court and the prosecution of those cases over to his office and being unable to make a convincing argument, Marquis takes it to
the State Legislature in a bill that would give DA's across the state the authority to take over any misdemeanor case from a city court. Makes one wonder why we need municipal courts.
Representative Boone says she has a responsibility to introduce legislation when requested by a constituent and Mr. Marquis qualifies. Mr. Marquis, obviously aware of the fact that without a champion this sort of bill usually either fails to get a hearing, or just dies in committee, is looking to the Governors Advisory Committee on DUII to give it's seal of approval to give the bill momentum.
Honestly, it doesn't matter to me which court hears the cases or who the prosecutor may be. I think most people think the same way unless, of course, a person has reason to believe it's easier to get "slap on the wrist" justice in a municipal courtroom. That sort of thing just hasn't been proven in the case of Astoria's municipal court. This bill would take away a local decision-making process and give more authority to the state with no good reason for doing so other than a desire to centralize control of the justice system.
Centralized control works very poorly in government. It just creates bigger, dirtier government. The Soviets proved that without a doubt. Russia is still trying to foster innovation and invention through state controlled big business and can't get anywhere with it. They do win the prize for most corrupt government on the planet. I'm not sure how many more lessons we need on this topic before we come to realize that while local control, right down to the city level isn't perfect, it's better. It's more representative of democracy and therefore closer to American ideals.
What do you think?
Sponsored by Representative Debbie Boone at the request of District Attorney Josh Marquis and apparently the topic of Marquis' appearance before the Governor's Advisory Committee
on DUII this Friday.
The bill changes the powers of the District Attorneys in Oregon so that they may take control of the investigation and prosecution of any misdemeanor committed in the county served by the District Attorney.
After several attempts to convince the Astoria City Council to turn over the misdemeanor DUII's currently handled in municipal court to the Circuit Court and the prosecution of those cases over to his office and being unable to make a convincing argument, Marquis takes it to
the State Legislature in a bill that would give DA's across the state the authority to take over any misdemeanor case from a city court. Makes one wonder why we need municipal courts.
Representative Boone says she has a responsibility to introduce legislation when requested by a constituent and Mr. Marquis qualifies. Mr. Marquis, obviously aware of the fact that without a champion this sort of bill usually either fails to get a hearing, or just dies in committee, is looking to the Governors Advisory Committee on DUII to give it's seal of approval to give the bill momentum.
Honestly, it doesn't matter to me which court hears the cases or who the prosecutor may be. I think most people think the same way unless, of course, a person has reason to believe it's easier to get "slap on the wrist" justice in a municipal courtroom. That sort of thing just hasn't been proven in the case of Astoria's municipal court. This bill would take away a local decision-making process and give more authority to the state with no good reason for doing so other than a desire to centralize control of the justice system.
Centralized control works very poorly in government. It just creates bigger, dirtier government. The Soviets proved that without a doubt. Russia is still trying to foster innovation and invention through state controlled big business and can't get anywhere with it. They do win the prize for most corrupt government on the planet. I'm not sure how many more lessons we need on this topic before we come to realize that while local control, right down to the city level isn't perfect, it's better. It's more representative of democracy and therefore closer to American ideals.
What do you think?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)