Bob, I hate that it's come to this. You look like a nice guy. Heck, you look like ME! Haha. It was funny when I did a google image search for you and five pages down I see my own face from my website www.kenricashe.com where your name appears several times in excerpts from references.

 

I know we share many common interests, although I suspect I like cats a hell of a lot more than you do ahahaha. But hey I like birds, too! In fact, my cats have always been indoor-only. I feed birds in my backyard on a regular basis, give them fresh water when it's freezing outside, and shoo away neighborhood cats that wander into my yard. I've always spayed or neutered every one of my cats as well. I have visited the Audubon Society more than once. And recently I was one of many who helped save the ancient Paradox walnut tree in SE PDX, an important eco-habitat for many animals including birds. I hope you at least appreciate all I've done for birds and how much I love them.

 

You and I also share a common interest in the environment and environmental services, so it's very perplexing how it's turned out we're on the opposite ends of the political spectrum in this Water District debate. I wish we had met and become at least Facebook friends before all this. But you've put yourself in the spotlight and it appears you've been the major force behind all the environmental groups officially opposing the PPWD water & politics reform initiative, which by the way reminds me eerily of the Healthy Kids Healthy Portland propaganda group who convinced so many people of a "dental emergency" that did not actually exist.

 

What I'm posting here is not a personal attack, but a response to many claims that have been made that are either unsupported by facts or missing the other side of the story.

 

I have no problem with the need to accept funding from people you don't like when the end justifies the means. I'm wary of many of the people supporting PPWD, too, so I was glad to hear that you'd already provided the justification for it.

 

I have no problem with anyone pointing out the logging interests on the PPWD side, but what about CH2M Hill funding the opposition? Has everyone forgotten how Joe Glicker's support for illegal Bull Run logging was stopped by water quality expert Doug Larson? And instead of getting fired for that, PWB gave him a promotion. Do you care about the threats to our drinking water at all? Do you see how water is the #2 most important part of our environment second only to air? Do you recognize how Bull Run logging and the quality of our drinking water are inextricably linked?

 

Next, you rave on about "corporate polluters". Siltronic receives environmental awards, while the worse corporate polluter NW Natural funds the PPWD opposition.

 

I have yet to see any STBRT PAC argument that isn't full of hypocrisy. And when it comes to your concern for environmental services, you're simply -- ahem -- barking up the wrong tree.

 

Hah! Sorry, couldn't resist that one.

 

UPDATE: Exchanged some facebook messages with Bob. First thing he said was: "The quote is a fake. Have not met you and never said that." I told him I never claimed he said it to me. I asked him if he remembers what he did say (just playing along) at the MTNA meeting. He dodged the question entirely, repeated his talking points, and of course remained completely silent on all my other questions and the overall issue of hypocrisy. Of course I expected no less from a person who's put everything he's got into such a misleading propaganda campaign. He would look quite foolish changing his position now, so he's stuck with it, and so are we.

 

UPDATE II: Digging deeper into the funding debate, turns out NW Natural is not just a funder of STBRT PAC. Superfund corporate polluter NW Natural is also a "Corporate Friend" of Portland Audubon. In fact they are currently listed at the top of their Business Members section in their own special category as "Business Benefactor". The conflict of interest could not be more obvious.