Post by Wyldcomfort on Mar 13, 2007 21:39:12 GMT -5
A friend sent this to me today - it fits our group so well....please keep feeding the "Good" wolf..... Here is the letter from Parks today - and my response.....
Two Wolves
One evening an old Cherokee told his grandson about a battle that
goes on inside people. He said, "My son, the battle is between two
"wolves" inside us all.
One is Evil. It is anger, envy, jealousy, sorrow, regret, greed,
arrogance, self-pity, guilt, resentment, inferiority, lies, false
pride, superiority, and ego.
The other is Good. It is joy, peace, love, hope, serenity,
humility, kindness, benevolence, empathy, generosity, truth,
compassion and faith."
The grandson thought about it for a minute and then asked his
grandfather: "Which wolf wins?"
The old Cherokee simply replied, "The one you feed."
***********************************************From Parks.....
Lindy: Hi, it was nice to meet you on Monday and take a few (albeit very few) minutes to hear your concerns. I think e-mail and the front steps of the capitol give us too little time to truly talk about what is happening with this legislation. I thought I would send you this quick note just to clarify a couple of things. I want to assure you that OPRD does intend to work cooperatively with ALL stakeholders on these issues. I hope you are sincere in your stated desire to do the same.
First, you should know, we at OPRD developed the legislative concept months ago with input from a broad base of stakeholders including riders and family members like yourself (and many others.) We did not enter into this lightly or arbitrarily or with any other agenda than making the sport safer for all. We then submitted the legislative concept to the Governor who thought it was strong enough to move forward to the Legislative Counsel to be drafted into a bill. The Legislature, upon reading the bill, felt that it was compelling enough to schedule the good public debate that we are having now.
As a general rule, most amendments to bills are not spearheaded by state employees; rather the legislators do that themselves. Only when we encounter errors in the bill as written, do we then work with legislators to propose amendments. At this point, we are happy to work with the Committee to propose amendments to SB 101 that would make it okay for the supervising rider to be on either a Class I or Class III rig, regardless of what the children are riding. That is what I would consider to be an error in the bill as written.
As we heard from your testimony and I have read in your e-mails, it is clear that you are opposed to the age restriction. If an amendment were proposed to SB 101 that changed that element of the bill, we at OPRD would consider our position at that time. However, it is ultimately up to the Legislature to decide which is better public policy -- an age restriction of seven, no age restriction, or some other age restriction. They have the question before them, have heard compelling testimony both in support and against, and it is up to them at this time.
As to your concerns about cc/age limits, SB 101 is completely silent on this issue. As Jim mentioned, the training will be developed in a collaborative manner and we will do our best to create a comprehensive, intuitive program that meets everyone's needs. The training program will not be used to limit people's access to the sport. It will only be used to raise awareness and arm riders with information they need to enjoy their sport of choice safely.
I hope this clarifies OPRD's position for you. Because my schedule is very busy, I would ask that you please contact Ron Price if you would like him to schedule some time for you to talk with a group of us at OPRD about your ideas.
Sincerely,
Kyleen Stone, Assistant Director
Recreation Programs and Planning
Oregon Parks and Recreation Department
***********************************************************************My response...........
Thank you Kyleen and yes I am sincere in working together... We have grown
to be a very large group and have the desire to be a part of the solution.
We have never eliminated anyone and have in fact tried very hard to bring
all parties, without ego, to the table. We are basing all of our
information on facts, common sense, and field time. There are problems that
need addressing and it is our intention to help you in anyway that we can.
But there is no fact that will justify limiting younger children from
participating. Our group is willing to step up to the plate for the right
reasons and quite frankly, we have considered our relationship with Parks,
Ron Price has been wonderful, as one of our group members. But our primary
concern is to protect families riding together. This isn't the group for
which you are having the problems, this isn't the group that is part of the
"statistics". We need your help to protect this for our children and
someday grandchildren. We do not want to exclude anyone that is physically
able to ride as long as they wear safety gear, ride the appropriate sized
veh. (best fit not age/cc), and are under the constant supervision of a
parent, legal guardian, or an adult that has been given that responsibility
by the parent. There are tens of thousands of folks that will support you
and make your job a whole lot easier. We need each other. I was clear with
my opposition and support of various parts of the bill. I even said it
would be a shame to lose this bill because an age limit. We didn't mount a
huge campaign against Senate Bill 101 because we felt like we could work
with you. It has been our intent all along. But we will fight any part of
the bill that will restrict a family member from participation. We have an
opportunity that few States have ever had - bringing the users together with
Parks, Medical Professionals, law enforcement, dealers, manufacturers,
clubs, legislators, etc. But it will be together that we succeed and with
that all of us need to work together for the whole. Without all of us on
board, the chances for failure is great. Parks has a chance they may never
have again - to be onboard with a massive amount of people willing to
support them. As you well know, it is a delicate relationship now, that
with trust, honesty, and communication can grow into something we will all
be proud of someday. The lack of willingness to reconsider the age limit
and define the type of training restrictions leaves us questioning this
relationship. You have been given our support - ask any of the Senators
about Senate Bill 49.... we didn't target any of your bills and in fact I
endorsed your helmet bill publicly. You indicated it is up to the
Legislators now - we really don't want to bombard them again with phone
calls and letters - but we will. We are strong now and connected. That is
not what I want because I value the relationship with Parks and know how
important it will be in the future. Involve us - it isn't too late. Thank you, Lindy
Two Wolves
One evening an old Cherokee told his grandson about a battle that
goes on inside people. He said, "My son, the battle is between two
"wolves" inside us all.
One is Evil. It is anger, envy, jealousy, sorrow, regret, greed,
arrogance, self-pity, guilt, resentment, inferiority, lies, false
pride, superiority, and ego.
The other is Good. It is joy, peace, love, hope, serenity,
humility, kindness, benevolence, empathy, generosity, truth,
compassion and faith."
The grandson thought about it for a minute and then asked his
grandfather: "Which wolf wins?"
The old Cherokee simply replied, "The one you feed."
***********************************************From Parks.....
Lindy: Hi, it was nice to meet you on Monday and take a few (albeit very few) minutes to hear your concerns. I think e-mail and the front steps of the capitol give us too little time to truly talk about what is happening with this legislation. I thought I would send you this quick note just to clarify a couple of things. I want to assure you that OPRD does intend to work cooperatively with ALL stakeholders on these issues. I hope you are sincere in your stated desire to do the same.
First, you should know, we at OPRD developed the legislative concept months ago with input from a broad base of stakeholders including riders and family members like yourself (and many others.) We did not enter into this lightly or arbitrarily or with any other agenda than making the sport safer for all. We then submitted the legislative concept to the Governor who thought it was strong enough to move forward to the Legislative Counsel to be drafted into a bill. The Legislature, upon reading the bill, felt that it was compelling enough to schedule the good public debate that we are having now.
As a general rule, most amendments to bills are not spearheaded by state employees; rather the legislators do that themselves. Only when we encounter errors in the bill as written, do we then work with legislators to propose amendments. At this point, we are happy to work with the Committee to propose amendments to SB 101 that would make it okay for the supervising rider to be on either a Class I or Class III rig, regardless of what the children are riding. That is what I would consider to be an error in the bill as written.
As we heard from your testimony and I have read in your e-mails, it is clear that you are opposed to the age restriction. If an amendment were proposed to SB 101 that changed that element of the bill, we at OPRD would consider our position at that time. However, it is ultimately up to the Legislature to decide which is better public policy -- an age restriction of seven, no age restriction, or some other age restriction. They have the question before them, have heard compelling testimony both in support and against, and it is up to them at this time.
As to your concerns about cc/age limits, SB 101 is completely silent on this issue. As Jim mentioned, the training will be developed in a collaborative manner and we will do our best to create a comprehensive, intuitive program that meets everyone's needs. The training program will not be used to limit people's access to the sport. It will only be used to raise awareness and arm riders with information they need to enjoy their sport of choice safely.
I hope this clarifies OPRD's position for you. Because my schedule is very busy, I would ask that you please contact Ron Price if you would like him to schedule some time for you to talk with a group of us at OPRD about your ideas.
Sincerely,
Kyleen Stone, Assistant Director
Recreation Programs and Planning
Oregon Parks and Recreation Department
***********************************************************************My response...........
Thank you Kyleen and yes I am sincere in working together... We have grown
to be a very large group and have the desire to be a part of the solution.
We have never eliminated anyone and have in fact tried very hard to bring
all parties, without ego, to the table. We are basing all of our
information on facts, common sense, and field time. There are problems that
need addressing and it is our intention to help you in anyway that we can.
But there is no fact that will justify limiting younger children from
participating. Our group is willing to step up to the plate for the right
reasons and quite frankly, we have considered our relationship with Parks,
Ron Price has been wonderful, as one of our group members. But our primary
concern is to protect families riding together. This isn't the group for
which you are having the problems, this isn't the group that is part of the
"statistics". We need your help to protect this for our children and
someday grandchildren. We do not want to exclude anyone that is physically
able to ride as long as they wear safety gear, ride the appropriate sized
veh. (best fit not age/cc), and are under the constant supervision of a
parent, legal guardian, or an adult that has been given that responsibility
by the parent. There are tens of thousands of folks that will support you
and make your job a whole lot easier. We need each other. I was clear with
my opposition and support of various parts of the bill. I even said it
would be a shame to lose this bill because an age limit. We didn't mount a
huge campaign against Senate Bill 101 because we felt like we could work
with you. It has been our intent all along. But we will fight any part of
the bill that will restrict a family member from participation. We have an
opportunity that few States have ever had - bringing the users together with
Parks, Medical Professionals, law enforcement, dealers, manufacturers,
clubs, legislators, etc. But it will be together that we succeed and with
that all of us need to work together for the whole. Without all of us on
board, the chances for failure is great. Parks has a chance they may never
have again - to be onboard with a massive amount of people willing to
support them. As you well know, it is a delicate relationship now, that
with trust, honesty, and communication can grow into something we will all
be proud of someday. The lack of willingness to reconsider the age limit
and define the type of training restrictions leaves us questioning this
relationship. You have been given our support - ask any of the Senators
about Senate Bill 49.... we didn't target any of your bills and in fact I
endorsed your helmet bill publicly. You indicated it is up to the
Legislators now - we really don't want to bombard them again with phone
calls and letters - but we will. We are strong now and connected. That is
not what I want because I value the relationship with Parks and know how
important it will be in the future. Involve us - it isn't too late. Thank you, Lindy