Detail, east Portland photo, courtesy Miles Hochstein / Portland Ground.

For old times' sake
The bojack bumper sticker -- only $1.50!

To order, click here.

Excellent tunes -- free! And on your browser right now. Just click on Radio Bojack!

E-mail us here.


This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on September 25, 2007 9:57 PM. The previous post in this blog was New Mount Tabor plan "does it all". The next post in this blog is Hellhounds on my tail. Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.



Law and Taxation
How Appealing
TaxProf Blog
Mauled Again
Tax Appellate Blog
A Taxing Matter
Josh Marquis
Native America, Discovered and Conquered
The Yin Blog
Ernie the Attorney
Above the Law
The Volokh Conspiracy
Going Concern
Bag and Baggage
Wealth Strategies Journal
Jim Hamilton's World of Securities Regulation
World of Work
The Faculty Lounge
Lowering the Bar
OrCon Law

Hap'nin' Guys
Tony Pierce
Parkway Rest Stop
Along the Gradyent
Dwight Jaynes
Bob Borden
Dingleberry Gazette
The Red Electric
Iced Borscht
Jeremy Blachman
Dean's Rhetorical Flourish
Straight White Guy
As Time Goes By
Dave Wagner
Jeff Selis
Alas, a Blog
Scott Hendison
The View Through the Windshield
Appliance Blog
The Bleat

Hap'nin' Gals
My Whim is Law
Lelo in Nopo
Attorney at Large
Linda Kruschke
The Non-Consumer Advocate
10 Steps to Finding Your Happy Place
A Pig of Success
Attorney at Large
Margaret and Helen
Kimberlee Jaynes
Cornelia Seigneur
And Sew It Goes
Mile 73
Rainy Day Thoughts
That Black Girl
Posie Gets Cozy
Cat Eyes
Rhi in Pink
Ragwaters, Bitters, and Blue Ruin
Rose City Journal
Type Like the Wind

Portland and Oregon
Isaac Laquedem
Rantings of a [Censored] Bus Driver
Jeff Mapes
Vintage Portland
The Portlander
South Waterfront
Amanda Fritz
O City Hall Reporters
Guilty Carnivore
Old Town by Larry Norton
The Alaunt
Bend Blogs
Lost Oregon
Cafe Unknown
Tin Zeroes
David's Oregon Picayune
Mark Nelsen's Weather Blog
Travel Oregon Blog
Portland Daily Photo
Portland Building Ads
Portland Food and
Dave Knows Portland
Idaho's Portugal
Alameda Old House History
MLK in Motion

Retired from Blogging
Various Observations...
The Daily E-Mail
Saving James
Portland Freelancer
Furious Nads (b!X)
Izzle Pfaff
The Grich
Kevin Allman
AboutItAll - Oregon
Lost in the Details
Worldwide Pablo
Tales from the Stump
Whitman Boys
Two Pennies
This Stony Planet
1221 SW 4th
I am a Fish
Here Today
What If...?
Superinky Fixations
The Rural Bus Route
Another Blogger
Mikeyman's Computer Treehouse
Portland Housing Blog

Wonderfully Wacky
Dave Barry
Borowitz Report
Stuff White People Like
Worst of the Web

Valuable Time-Wasters
My Gallery of Jacks
Litterbox, On the Prowl
Litterbox, Bag of Bones
Litterbox, Scratch
Ride That Donkey
Singin' Horses
Rally Monkey
Simon Swears
Strong Bad's E-mail

Oregon News
The Oregonian
Portland Tribune
Willamette Week
The Sentinel
Southeast Examiner
Northwest Examiner
Sellwood Bee
Mid-County Memo
Vancouver Voice
Eugene Register-Guard
OPB - Portland
Salem Statesman-Journal
Oregon Capitol News
Portland Business Journal
Daily Journal of Commerce
Oregon Business
Portland Info Net
McMinnville News Register
Lake Oswego Review
The Daily Astorian
Bend Bulletin
Corvallis Gazette-Times
Roseburg News-Review
Medford Mail-Tribune
Ashland Daily Tidings
Newport News-Times
Albany Democrat-Herald
The Eugene Weekly
Portland IndyMedia
The Columbian

The Beatles
Bruce Springsteen
Joni Mitchell
Ella Fitzgerald
Steve Earle
Joe Ely
Stevie Wonder
Lou Rawls

E-mail, Feeds, 'n' Stuff

Tuesday, September 25, 2007

Horrible news for Measure 49 fans

We cancelled our subscription to the O a while back. Haven't missed it at all. But the way the O's web site is set up, the columnists and the editorials are not displayed anywhere near as prominently as they are in the hard copy, and we must confess, we usually don't get to them any more unless a reader or something in the blogosphere points us to that part of the O's web pages. Breaking news and daily stories? Sure. Latest views from the chief Newhouse lackeys in Portland? Not a priority.

Today they threw a dead-tree version of the paper up on our porch. Whether they were working off an old subscriber list, or were trying to get our business back, or just screwed up, we'll never know. But we flipped to the editorial page, and there we saw some disheartening news: The O is endorsing Ballot Measure 49. Given how out of touch with the electorate they are, that's a bad omen.

Comments (30)

I was driving down Dodge Park Blvd the other day and noticed one of those "Yes on 49" signs-- it read "Cornfields or Congestion?"

Now I guess a sign like this would make sense parked up in front of a cornfield, but it wasn't-- it was in front of a 3500+ square foot "McMansion" atop a landscaped 5 acre lot!

The hypocrisy gets even deeper when looking around the neighborhood-- most of the same types of development with the occasional Christmas tree farm. No cornfields. No food crops what-so-ever.

"Out of touch with the electorate" is very true. For the past few years before and after the passage of 37, Anna Griffith and other O reporters "attempted" to be fair by their interviews with parties contrary to the O's editorial slants on 7, 37 and now 49. But many points, examples, arguments given by those of us that have actual, concrete evidence that is contrary, those opinions are not reported by the O. If they are, many times they are slighted, exaggerated, miss quoted, editorialized, you name it. The O doesn't report the issues, every article is an editorial. Just look at the recent deluge of "editorial reporting.

"The hypocrisy gets even deeper" when you have pro M49 ads with people standing in front of massive housing developments on the fringes of the tri-county area that occurred BECAUSE of METRO and our present state-wide planning. For example, its okay for the beautiful, rolling farm lands of Bethany on the outskirts of our urban area, or the Villabois outside of Wilsonville, or Sunnyside, Damascus, Happy Valley to be developed; but it is not okay for a property on Skyline, or Oregon City, SW Humphrey Blvd. that are all surrounded by urban development-to be developed, because the heavy hand of government dictates that it shall not be developed. That is the "hypocrisy".

No food crops what-so-ever.

Better Villabois then the Dundee Hills, which is why Oregon wine growers --a not insubstantial part of our agricultural community-- supports Ballot Measure 40.

You need to get out in the country more, Lee, and recognize all the farmland that's managed to remain so thanks to the "heavy hand of government." Planning really isn't a dirty word.

Frank Dufay: Better Villabois then the Dundee Hills, which is why Oregon wine growers --a not insubstantial part of our agricultural community-- supports Ballot Measure 40.
JK: Commiss Sam tells us to expect 300,000 new people in Portland (about a 50% increase in population) in the same area. So, do you want your neighborhood trashed by one skinny house for every two current houses just to be able to sip little grape juice produced by rich Oregon farmers who probably use more chemicals and water per acre than homes would.?

Every home built in a new neighborhood is one less high density unit in my neighborhood.


Urban hi density has become a tenet in the Portland religion of population control and the O knows it's got the pulpit.

Frank you are just plain wrong is youthbnk M37 threatens the Dundee Hills or Yamhill county wine country.
And I'm sure Lee gets out there plenty.

The fact is M37 is not qualified on nearly enough land to make a dent on any part of the state. Despite the deceit from M49 proponents and the Oregonian.

"Planning really is a dirty word" as it has become nothing short of fraud and abuse of the definition of "ploanning".

What you call planning is nothing but blind and irrational obstruction and regulation.
There hasn't been any legitimate planning
in decades with the exception of the heavily subsidized pockets of Municipal schemes.
There is no "plan" for either traffic, affordable housing, industry, jobs, basic infrastructure or funding of basic services.
You seem to be proud of "planning" because of imaginary ploans and fabricated evils from M37 freedom.

I'll take support for M49 from the O. They have a large audience.

That's what Nick Fish said.

Frank, now you are pitting one kind of farmland against another. Villabois sits on class 1 soils while the hills of Dundee are 2 and 3, has considerable water sources vs the grape hillsides, logically is easier to farm than hillside grape property, is closer to infrastructures (I-5) to get products to market, and closer to markets vs Dundee.

But I don't mean to pick one area of farmland over another in deciding who gets to farm, live where. You are a reasonable person that can see that Villabois-Wilsonville has just as much agricultural resources as Dundee. Why do we let heavy handed state wide planning determine who will be the have and have nots? There needs be be some reasonableness in state wide planning.

Better Villabois then the Dundee Hills, which is why Oregon wine growers --a not insubstantial part of our agricultural community-- supports Ballot Measure 40.

More misinformation from one of those who, no doubt, "know the voters intentions when they voted for M37".

The OWA (Oregon Winegrowers Association), which has come out in support of M49, represents less than 1/3 of the 787 total wineries and vineyards in Oregon. I'll hazard a guess (correct me if I'm wrong) that, of the 250 members of the OWA, not all support the measure. Extrapolating from such a small sample works both ways; Perhaps the rest of your "...not insubstantial part of our agricultural community" does NOT support M49 at a 4 to 1 ratio.

How about channelling ALL of your agricultural pals, Farmer Frank, not just those who agree with you.

PS: "Strawberry Fields or Strip Malls" in a public right of way is visual blight - I have just done my part to eliminate it.

Just curious Frank; how many wineries are threatened by M37 claims? How are they threatened? If vineyards are so valuable, wouldn't they be protected from being sold off for development?

If our farm land is so valuable, then why is it in danger of being developed?

M37 threatens the status quo, which threat, NOW, is a dire hazard to all of us, don't you know?

Fairness and the fact that regulatory bodies can choose to pay to preserve the status quo, are peripheral to the real agenda of the M49 folks - they want something for nothing.

Why SB100 and subsequent land use and regulatory restrictions weren't so threatening over the past 36 years and didn't arouse the same passion in these same folks is probably simply due to the fact that they probably didn't live here and, therefore, didn't have a vested interest in the status praevius.

I'm sure Jack can give me the correct Latin for that.

Frank, more questions.

When most wineries have homes built on their properties and sometimes more than one for relatives, caretakers, etc., then why can't an adjoining farm property that wants to build a few homes or even twelve homes on a 160 acre parcel do so?

What is the threshold number in country homes that makes wineries fail?

Doesn't Oregon's "right to farm" laws protect wineries too?

Don't wineries qualify for farm tax exemptions that help them stay in business?

Why is it okay to build swank, tourist hotels, spas in wine country with all the accompanying traffic, etc. but not homes on the only few M37 claims that are really nearby/adjacent to existing wineries?

Frank, I am wondering if the results from the 7000 state wide M37 claims will be as much as the claims request, and what is the total land area that would be "destroyed".

Since over 70% of the claims are from people over age 70, one would think by the time all the legal, public review, permitting, development time settles, that many claims will not be executed because M37 rights don't extend to survivors.

I know on advice of attorneys, land planners, etc. that most claims were filed asking for a higher number of development rights than what is desired by the applicants. I know of several family trusts who filed M37 claims requested the maximum sensible amount because of legal fiduciary requirements. Most pro 49 advocates cite the claimed numbers, and not the reality of what is likely to be built.

I know that state, county, and city requirements concerning water, necessary infrastructure, health/public safety, and sanitary septics/closed systems will and has limited M37 claims from what has been proposed and accepted. The pro 49 voices are not citing these reduced amounts.

The 7000 claims throughout Oregon must constitute a very small portion of all the individual property parcels in the state-maybe 7000 compared to 10 Million parcels. Then the land area must even be even a more insignificant portion since over 80% of Oregon's land is owned by the Feds and the State, not counting all the other public owned open/park lands. Then the land area of each M37 claim doesn't mean all of the land area will be developed. Many small and even the few large M37 parcels doesn't propose development throughout the whole parcel because of environmental, septic, access, etc. requirements. This all means the M37 claims are actually only a very small percentage (1/1000 of one percent) of our now total urbanized area which is only 3% of our whole states land area.

I don't see the doomsday. Remember, 1000 Friends and other anti M37 people claimed M37 as "doomsday". It didn't come to pass and the electorate saw through the "doomsday" rhetoric.

I don't see the doomsday. Remember, 1000 Friends and other anti M37 people claimed M37 as "doomsday". It didn't come to pass and the electorate saw through the "doomsday" rhetoric.

This argument, that will be used by OIA, is dishonest. Large property developments can take years under the best circumstances, which M37 isn't. It will take 10 years for Oregonians to see how that measure will play out, and I predict we would be sickened by what it would produce.

Not nearly as sickened at the sight of what our planning has produced and will for decades to come.
In fact, proportianatley there won't be any sickening M37 effects.

There are so relative few parcels that qualify for M37 and very few more will arrive that the pandamonium is ridiculous.
The oppostion to M37 is all super exagerated nonsense portraying the claims as sweeping destruction. Yet our planning arena continually mandates large subdivisions right next to farms all the time.
The pics of tightly packed houses in subdivisions next to farms we see in Yes on 49 commercials are All from the planners and UGB. None of those pics are M37 subdivisions and very few, if any planned M37 subdivisions are that damn ugly as the stuff we have witnessed from the planners.

How dishonest is it for the Yes on M49 campaign to use the pics of Metro subdivisions to suggest M37 causes them?.

Jimbo: I know of several smaller M37 claims that when accepted by both the state and their immediate jurisdictions, that not one building permit has been issued. You would be hard pressed to name one building permit yet issued after approval. Most county governments have placed many obstacles in front of even small developments (In my examples I'm talking about one to three lot subdivisions that received M37 approval) to stall development. Lane Co. and several others even put approval processes on hold for different reasons, like "reviewing Attorney General Hardy Myers' Opinion". It was only an "opinion" and not a court order.

One would think that concerning these small one to three lot subdivisions under the M37 scenario would be approved and built by now after three and 1/2 years, or at least underway. That is what 1000 Friends and their friends are now saying they want. But why have 1000 Friends, their friendly courts, planners, counties not allowed even these small approvals to proceed forward? I think the electorate has figured it out-they know that even those developments are not wanted by 1000 Friends and the American Land Institute (essentially a one-man pony show run by Henry Richmond, former 1000 Friends director and Neil Goldschmidt cohort).

There are many modifiers that I have pointed out that fairly protect neighbors and the state from the "wanton destruction" that pro 49ers claim. Yes, there are probably some exceptions where we as a majority might say "that project was not desirable", as we get from our present state wide planning. But the same "exceptions" have also applied to 30 years under 100s' state wide planning. There have been many landowners who have suffered, not fairly treated under 100; and no one listened or cared in government.

M49 is really a reversal to M37 and not a compromise. Those of us that have studied both measures, experienced first hand the M37 process, know that M49 is even 100 times more arduous, and in many cases impossible to acquire approval and at tremendous costs.

The 49er spinmeisters will try to sell the electorate that approval is easy, not costly, and almost a given. Not true as careful reading of M49 proves. Most of the electorate hasn't even personally experienced even the so-called easy process of getting a remodeling permit. M49 is 100 times more difficult and rigged not to be given in most cases.

There's a destination resort planned for the agricultural land right above Domaine Drouhin --who makes some of the best Pinot Noir in the world-- thanks to Measure 37. Do we really want chem-lawns on our beautiful, productive wine country land?

I don't see how anyone can argue that the Oregon Winegrowers Association doesn't speak for Oregon wine growers.

The farm where Forward Stride keeps its horses for its therapy for children and disabled adults --and where my wife volunteers and where we keep OUR horse-- is being booted out by Villabois' less than artlfull sprawl. I'm no fan of sprawl...nor do I think that there's no answer to urban density other than ugly, badly- planned-for infill. Don't offer false choices.

The Dundee Hills have awesome soil, though I'm no Farmer Frank. Similarly, you don't water grape vines the way you do corn, and many growers don't water their vines at all to futher stress them and produce better product...and we have some of the finest product in the world.

Measure 49 brings balance and fairness, not just uncontrolled growth. Uncontrolled growth is a cancer, be it on SE Division, or in Carlton.

"Do we really want chem-lawns on our beautiful, productive wine country land?"

Fine, then the developers will just have to buy the commissioners more lunches to let them change the zoning if 49 passes. Then they can build over farmland just like in Bethany (pre-M37.)

The issue isn't what land owners are doing as much as the small number of people mking zoning decisions is doing.


Come on Measure 49 isn't about "balance and fairness" and M37 does not equal "uncontrolled growth" or "cancer".

If every M37 claim in Wine country resulted in a house and lawn it wouldn't even dent the wine industry or wine soil at all. There's not enough claims that qualify to amount to anything like what you mistakenly envision.
Furthermore, the constraints of remaining regulations and permit requirements will make all M37 construction jump through every single hoop that nonM37 construction does. Moreover, I have yet to read about a single M37 claim subdivision that is as bad as the ones we get from Metro-like, forced, ugly density next to farms all around the UGB.
THAT is the worst kind of sprawl possible yet it gets a pass from all those falling prey to the anti-M37 blitz.
And Frankly, I'm sick of the daily anti-M37 campaign advancing their propaganda with help from our newspapers.
It's dishonest, unethical and without regard for any balance or fairness.

Yeah--where is one to turn for balance and fairnes, besides FNC?

Frank, it seems like you just don't like the idea and look of the resort, not that it really has any negative environmantal impact on Oregon wine country. Quite the contrary, I bet the resort will attract more people to enjoy that industry.

I feel your attitude smacks of elitism -- just like the snooty pourers up at Drouhin's massive, environmentally unfriendly tasting room.

And can you quantify the 'fairness' innate to M49? How is it fair to deny someone the use of their land?

There's a destination resort planned for the agricultural land right above Domaine Drouhin --who makes some of the best Pinot Noir in the world-- thanks to Measure 37. Do we really want chem-lawns on our beautiful, productive wine country land?

Glenora Wine Cellars in Dundee has its own Hotel. Are people worried about farmland or competition?

you don't water grape vines the way you do corn, and many growers don't water their vines at all to futher stress them and produce better product...and we have some of the finest product in the world.

I shouldn't have called you Farmer Frank. It should have been M. Dufay, viticulteur.

Je suis de'sole'.

However, you must have raised a good crop of something to have the straw to stuff this guy with:

Measure 49 brings balance and fairness, not just uncontrolled growth. Uncontrolled growth is a cancer, be it on SE Division, or in Carlton.

Is that the M49 version of Dorothy English - minus the real person?

Frank, it seems like you just don't like the idea and look of the resort, not that it really has any negative environmantal impact on Oregon wine country.

Domaine Drouhin is downhill from the proposed resort. Any chemicals used on their chem-lawn goes, uh, where?

A large resort at the highest point? Ever hear of light pollution?

I bet the resort will attract more people to enjoy that industry.

No doubt. I've talked to winemakers in the area who consider it a mixed bag...a loss of good vineyard land but, sure, it will bring well-heeled business.

I feel your attitude smacks of elitism -- just like the snooty pourers up at Drouhin's massive, environmentally unfriendly tasting room.

I'm a member of Domaine Drouhin's wine color me "snooty" I guess. I do like my Oregon Pinots, and they make some of the best.

I think the issue is scale. My wife and I have stayed at the bed and breakfast across the road from Domaine Drouhin...and the one not too far below. It's a matter of scale. Resort though? Why not build it on the flats below? I've no issue with a resort where it makes sense. Building it on awesome farmland is a waste of that farmland. And if you haven't been on the "road" that takes you up the long will folks that want resort amenities tolerate that dusty, gritty country road?

Pave paradise, put up a...whatever?

"Any chemicals used on their chem-lawn goes, uh, where?"

Into growing nice lawn.
Just like the farmers use fertilizer to grow nice crops.

Come on Frank you're killing me.

"Building it on awesome farmland is a waste of that farmland".
No it isn't, it helps utilize the farmland for farming by helping the wine industry.
No different than building out building and processing facilities.
Big deal. It doesn't equilat to paving over the wine country.

And any construction will have to comply with all sorts of building permit and inspection requirements including the containment and midigation of runoff.

"Building it on awesome farmland is a waste of that farmland".
No it isn't, it helps utilize the farmland for farming by helping the wine industry. No different than building out building and processing facilities.

I may not be Farmer Frank, but I believe there is a major difference between building "processing facilities" for grapes...and a destination "resort" that doesn't have anything to do with agriculture. And is built for "the view" for its patrons, to the detriment of everyone else.

What's so bad about building the "resort" on the valley floor? And save the good soil for what brings visitors in the first place...exceptional, extraordinary, vineyards?

Once again Frank, if that land is so valuable for vineyards, then why is a resort going there? BTW, some of the best farmland in Oregon has been developed under Metro's 2040 plan.

And just how is that resort to the detriment of everyone else? Seem the only people upset about it is Domain Drouhin and a few other wineries. It's becoming more obvious that they just don't want anyone else to enjoy their little slice of Burgundy.


Voting for M49 does three things. One: It sends a message to government that we, the people, are ok with allowing the rules to be changed on us after we have acquired property. Two: It sends a message to our government that we are OK with them making us vote on issues time and time again until we arrive at the outcome "they" desire. Never mind what the people voted for the first two or three times. Three: It opens the door to allow government to dictate what you can or cannot do with your personal property, even though you had the right to do what you wanted with it previously. Today it is "planning" and land use restrictions. Tomorrow it may be determined that the 2007 SUV you just bought is causing too much pollution. You can own it as long as you like, but you cannot drive it!


As a lawyer/blogger, I get
to be a member of:

In Vino Veritas

Lange, Pinot Gris 2015
Kiona, Lemberger 2014
Willamette Valley, Pinot Gris 2015
Aix, Rosé de Provence 2016
Marchigüe, Cabernet 2013
Inazío Irruzola, Getariako Txakolina Rosé 2015
Maso Canali, Pinot Grigio 2015
Campo Viejo, Rioja Reserva 2011
Kirkland, Côtes de Provence Rosé 2016
Cantele, Salice Salentino Reserva 2013
Whispering Angel, Côtes de Provence Rosé 2013
Avissi, Prosecco
Cleto Charli, Lambrusco di Sorbara Secco, Vecchia Modena
Pique Poul, Rosé 2016
Edmunds St. John, Bone-Jolly Rosé 2016
Stoller, Pinot Noir Rosé 2016
Chehalem, Inox Chardonnay 2015
The Four Graces, Pinot Gris 2015
Gascón, Colosal Red 2013
Cardwell Hill, Pinot Gris 2015
L'Ecole No. 41, Merlot 2013
Della Terra, Anonymus
Willamette Valley, Dijon Clone Chardonnay 2013
Wraith, Cabernet, Eidolon Estate 2012
Januik, Red 2015
Tomassi, Valpolicella, Rafaél, 2014
Sharecropper's Pinot Noir 2013
Helix, Pomatia Red Blend 2013
La Espera, Cabernet 2011
Campo Viejo, Rioja Reserva 2011
Villa Antinori, Toscana 2013
Locations, Spanish Red Wine
Locations, Argentinian Red Wine
La Antigua Clásico, Rioja 2011
Shatter, Grenache, Maury 2012
Argyle, Vintage Brut 2011
Abacela, Vintner's Blend #16 Abacela, Fiesta Tempranillo 2014
Benton Hill, Pinot Gris 2015
Primarius, Pinot Gris 2015
Januik, Merlot 2013
Napa Cellars, Cabernet 2013
J. Bookwalter, Protagonist 2012
LAN, Rioja Edicion Limitada 2011
Beaulieu, Cabernet, Rutherford 2009
Denada Cellars, Cabernet, Maipo Valley 2014
Marchigüe, Cabernet, Colchagua Valley 2013
Oberon, Cabernet 2014
Hedges, Red Mountain 2012
Balboa, Rose of Grenache 2015
Ontañón, Rioja Reserva 2015
Three Horse Ranch, Pinot Gris 2014
Archery Summit, Vireton Pinot Gris 2014
Nelms Road, Merlot 2013
Chateau Ste. Michelle, Pinot Gris 2014
Conn Creek, Cabernet, Napa 2012
Conn Creek, Cabernet, Napa 2013
Villa Maria, Sauvignon Blanc 2015
G3, Cabernet 2013
Chateau Smith, Cabernet, Washington State 2014
Abacela, Vintner's Blend #16
Willamette Valley, Rose of Pinot Noir, Whole Clusters 2015
Albero, Bobal Rose 2015
Ca' del Baio Barbaresco Valgrande 2012
Goodfellow, Reserve Pinot Gris, Clover 2014
Lugana, San Benedetto 2014
Wente, Cabernet, Charles Wetmore 2011
La Espera, Cabernet 2011
King Estate, Pinot Gris 2015
Adelsheim, Pinot Gris 2015
Trader Joe's, Pinot Gris, Willamette Valley 2015
La Vite Lucente, Toscana Red 2013
St. Francis, Cabernet, Sonoma 2013
Kendall-Jackson, Pinot Noir, California 2013
Beaulieu, Cabernet, Napa Valley 2013
Erath, Pinot Noir, Estate Selection 2012
Abbot's Table, Columbia Valley 2014
Intrinsic, Cabernet 2014
Oyster Bay, Pinot Noir 2010
Occhipinti, SP68 Bianco 2014
Layer Cake, Shiraz 2013
Desert Wind, Ruah 2011
WillaKenzie, Pinot Gris 2014
Abacela, Fiesta Tempranillo 2013
Des Amis, Rose 2014
Dunham, Trautina 2012
RoxyAnn, Claret 2012
Del Ri, Claret 2012
Stoppa, Emilia, Red 2004
Primarius, Pinot Noir 2013
Domaines Bunan, Bandol Rose 2015
Albero, Bobal Rose 2015
Deer Creek, Pinot Gris 2015
Beaulieu, Rutherford Cabernet 2013
Archery Summit, Vireton Pinot Gris 2014
King Estate, Pinot Gris, Backbone 2014
Oberon, Napa Cabernet 2013
Apaltagua, Envero Carmenere Gran Reserva 2013
Chateau des Arnauds, Cuvee des Capucins 2012
Nine Hats, Red 2013
Benziger, Cabernet, Sonoma 2012
Roxy Ann, Claret 2012
Januik, Merlot 2012
Conundrum, White 2013
St. Francis, Sonoma Cabernet 2012

The Occasional Book

Phil Stanford - Rose City Vice
Kenneth R. Feinberg - What is Life Worth?
Kent Haruf - Our Souls at Night
Peter Carey - True History of the Kelly Gang
Suzanne Collins - The Hunger Games
Amy Stewart - Girl Waits With Gun
Philip Roth - The Plot Against America
Norm Macdonald - Based on a True Story
Christopher Buckley - Boomsday
Ryan Holiday - The Obstacle is the Way
Ruth Sepetys - Between Shades of Gray
Richard Adams - Watership Down
Claire Vaye Watkins - Gold Fame Citrus
Markus Zusak - I am the Messenger
Anthony Doerr - All the Light We Cannot See
James Joyce - Dubliners
Cheryl Strayed - Torch
William Golding - Lord of the Flies
Saul Bellow - Mister Sammler's Planet
Phil Stanford - White House Call Girl
John Kaplan & Jon R. Waltz - The Trial of Jack Ruby
Kent Haruf - Eventide
David Halberstam - Summer of '49
Norman Mailer - The Naked and the Dead
Maria Dermoȗt - The Ten Thousand Things
William Faulkner - As I Lay Dying
Markus Zusak - The Book Thief
Christopher Buckley - Thank You for Smoking
William Shakespeare - Othello
Joseph Conrad - Heart of Darkness
Bill Bryson - A Short History of Nearly Everything
Cheryl Strayed - Tiny Beautiful Things
Sara Varon - Bake Sale
Stephen King - 11/22/63
Paul Goldstein - Errors and Omissions
Mark Twain - A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court
Steve Martin - Born Standing Up: A Comic's Life
Beverly Cleary - A Girl from Yamhill, a Memoir
Kent Haruf - Plainsong
Hope Larson - A Wrinkle in Time, the Graphic Novel
Rudyard Kipling - Kim
Peter Ames Carlin - Bruce
Fran Cannon Slayton - When the Whistle Blows
Neil Young - Waging Heavy Peace
Mark Bego - Aretha Franklin, the Queen of Soul (2012 ed.)
Jenny Lawson - Let's Pretend This Never Happened
J.D. Salinger - Franny and Zooey
Charles Dickens - A Christmas Carol
Timothy Egan - The Big Burn
Deborah Eisenberg - Transactions in a Foreign Currency
Kurt Vonnegut Jr. - Slaughterhouse Five
Kathryn Lance - Pandora's Genes
Cheryl Strayed - Wild
Fyodor Dostoyevsky - The Brothers Karamazov
Jack London - The House of Pride, and Other Tales of Hawaii
Jack Walker - The Extraordinary Rendition of Vincent Dellamaria
Colum McCann - Let the Great World Spin
Niccolò Machiavelli - The Prince
Harper Lee - To Kill a Mockingbird
Emma McLaughlin & Nicola Kraus - The Nanny Diaries
Brian Selznick - The Invention of Hugo Cabret
Sharon Creech - Walk Two Moons
Keith Richards - Life
F. Sionil Jose - Dusk
Natalie Babbitt - Tuck Everlasting
Justin Halpern - S#*t My Dad Says
Mark Herrmann - The Curmudgeon's Guide to Practicing Law
Barry Glassner - The Gospel of Food
Phil Stanford - The Peyton-Allan Files
Jesse Katz - The Opposite Field
Evelyn Waugh - Brideshead Revisited
J.K. Rowling - Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone
David Sedaris - Holidays on Ice
Donald Miller - A Million Miles in a Thousand Years
Mitch Albom - Have a Little Faith
C.S. Lewis - The Magician's Nephew
F. Scott Fitzgerald - The Great Gatsby
William Shakespeare - A Midsummer Night's Dream
Ivan Doig - Bucking the Sun
Penda Diakité - I Lost My Tooth in Africa
Grace Lin - The Year of the Rat
Oscar Hijuelos - Mr. Ives' Christmas
Madeline L'Engle - A Wrinkle in Time
Steven Hart - The Last Three Miles
David Sedaris - Me Talk Pretty One Day
Karen Armstrong - The Spiral Staircase
Charles Larson - The Portland Murders
Adrian Wojnarowski - The Miracle of St. Anthony
William H. Colby - Long Goodbye
Steven D. Stark - Meet the Beatles
Phil Stanford - Portland Confidential
Rick Moody - Garden State
Jonathan Schwartz - All in Good Time
David Sedaris - Dress Your Family in Corduroy and Denim
Anthony Holden - Big Deal
Robert J. Spitzer - The Spirit of Leadership
James McManus - Positively Fifth Street
Jeff Noon - Vurt

Road Work

Miles run year to date: 113
At this date last year: 155
Total run in 2016: 155
In 2015: 271
In 2014: 401
In 2013: 257
In 2012: 129
In 2011: 113
In 2010: 125
In 2009: 67
In 2008: 28
In 2007: 113
In 2006: 100
In 2005: 149
In 2004: 204
In 2003: 269

Clicky Web Analytics