The sad piece of the whole thing is that the State Government is now spending their little hearts away and ignoring their counties while they collapse.

Watch for the State to jump in at the last minute and give the Counties a pittance and try to make it sound like they are charitable and riding in on their big white horse. You live in a very sick country and a very sick state. Bad politics are paving a road into our heartland from Mexico and can't pay it's bill to the local rural Counties. NAFTA CRAPTA....The Shoeshine Boy


From Miz Biz 5/17/07
Miz Biz asks:  I heard a rumor recently that Skip Baker recently
bought property from Larry Olson, who owns the property on which the
proposed Tire Reklaim Co. is to be placed.  Suppose Mr. Baker got a good deal?

Dear Miz Biz;
While I can't confirm what you suggest. It has been purported before that Mr. Baker is involved with a couple of the high roller developers in our area in more than one pecuniary venture. If that is the case it presents a sad scenario of how Kings are made in Columbia County. It is pretty well known that this type of conflict of interest exists between a number of elected officials and developers. In fact some of the elected officials over the years have promoted their own properties without stepping away from a decision regarding their value.  Mr. Baker is only a public figure and not an elected official. There is some room for question about the application of legality but all in all it's a slimy way to conduct business as a City employee if it is indeed true. Stay tuned as I suspect some digging will occur since the Tire Torching Plant is a "hot" topic in River City....The Shoeshineboy

From Willy 5/15/07
Dear Shoe Shine Boy
Today we had a big hearing about building a tire recycling plant.  A
large amount of people turned out.   Most were opposed to this.  One
man mentioned something about the high cancer rate in our
community.  Another mentioned that it was against the law to
incinerate garbage within three miles of a school.   Evidently this
"Clean" plant is still a incinerator.   Will it bring the highest
quality of life for our residents?  Will it be to our benefit,  or
are these people still lying to us?

My guess is that over 90% of the people there were opposed.  If so
many people are opposed how can the city be for it?

I really want to hear what you have to say.

Dear Willy;

I would think that any proposal of this type would gain attention and fill a council chamber to capacity. The folks in the St. Helens area have banded together more than once in the past to shoot down the burner types of industry regardless of how many jobs or how much tax income is promised. These type of industries promise state of the art processes but after the Bergsoe debacle in the early 1980's none of the area residents are willing to take that approach for granted.

In addition this facility seems to have smoothed over, soon to be retired City dictator B. Little and his sidekick Baker as well. But there is probably a good amount of financing behind the proposal and satisfying a couple of public figures should be no problem.

The catch here is that City Planner Baker appears to have given the plant a green light prior to the public asking the hard questions and hearing the answers. With that Bakers staff reports probably show the plant to be compatible with the rules of the City since he knows how to shape a report to conform with his decisions.

If that is the case, It will be difficult for the planning group or the City Fathers to say no. Expect them to put the burden on the state agencies like DEQ and the like so they can hand off the real decision. (Chickens)... That may well start a recall attempt or two and a cry to fire Baker for making the people of the City his last concern. It may also start a ballot title petition to put decisions of this type in front of the people or make any burning facility illegal to sight within the City limits. If it wasn't for guys like Baker and Little your web page wouldn't have anything to chide about.....The Shoeshine Boy


From Sylvia 5/13/07
Dear Shoe Shine Boy
The Port of St. Helens no longer has Williamson running it, even though they are still paying his salary.  They have hired a man at an outrageous salary ($110 am hour) to work Part time.

What is the Port doing for us?  Do you think that they are being fiscally responsible? Are taxpayers getting their money worth from them?  Do you have an predictions as to the future of the Port?

Dear Sylvia,
The Port of St. Helens is an interesting group and it seems the more things change the