Skip to main content
You have permission to edit this article.
Edit
Letter: Looking at what is 'in the record'
editor's pick
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Letter: Looking at what is 'in the record'

{{featured_button_text}}
Mailbox stock art

“In the record” summary, not “For the record”:

• I voted against the original “sex offender” ordinance because of a limitation of two offenders without accounting for a building’s capacity. Other councilmembers voted for reasons of their own to defeat it.

• Opposed to indefinite postponement, I requested a workshop – with unanimous Council support – to create an ordinance for Kelso’s particular need and withstand potential legal challenges, a concern of councilmembers and staff in discussion.

• I voted against the city attorney’s Moratorium Ordinance Draft based on the workshop believing it didn’t meet the criteria for emergency passage.

• Inadvertently contributing to “indefinite delay,” I requested reconsideration of the Moratorium Ordinance and a Council majority voted its approval.

Not “in the record”:

• Discussion about hiring consultants outside of city staff and committees.

• Regulation of “sex offenders” only, often emphasized.

• Lack of regard for current treatment facilities.

• Dismissal of citizens’ concerns.

Kelso’s City Council has been and remains receptive to ideas for improving quality of life for our fellow citizens and committed to responsible administration of limited civic funds.

Richard McCaine

Kelso

0
0
0
0
0

Catch the latest in Opinion

* I understand and agree that registration on or use of this site constitutes agreement to its user agreement and privacy policy.

Related to this story

Most Popular

Get up-to-the-minute news sent straight to your device.

Topics

News Alert

Breaking News