Bend lists Mirror Pond applicants

By Hillary Borrud / The Bulletin

The Mirror Pond ad hoc committee will wait until at least mid-October to select a couple of citizen members from among 11 applicants for the openings. In the meantime, two members of the committee and an attorney for the Bend Park & Recreation District will meet privately with Pacific Power, the utility company which owns the dam that created Mirror Pond.

The Bend City Council and park district board created the ad hoc committee to gather information such as Pacific Power’s plans for the dam. The committee is supposed to report back to the City Council and park district board with a recommendation for the future of Mirror Pond. The Deschutes River is depositing silt that will eventually build into wetlands in the pond.

The ad hoc committee includes two Bend city councilors, two park board members, park district Executive Director Don Horton and Bend Community Development Director Mel Oberst. City councilors and park board members also said earlier this year that up to three citizens should be on the committee.

Citizens who met the Sept. 13 application deadline have a variety of backgrounds, according to their resumés and letters of interest.

Daniel Wadosky owned a Bend accounting and tax firm from 1984 to 2003. Recently, Wadosky worked as a volunteer on river habitat restoration projects; he wrote in a statement that this experience provided him with a valuable perspective on Mirror Pond.

Mike Olin wrote that he has lived in Bend for 39 years, and was involved in a previous Mirror Pond committee and in the Old Bend Neighborhood Association.

J. Ned Dempsey is a civil engineer and the owner and president of Century West Engineering Corp., which works on projects such as designing and operating water quality and flow monitoring stations. Dempsey previously worked for the U.S. Geological Survey, studying sediment buildup and working on other stream projects, according to his resumé.

Rick Storm wrote in a letter to the committee that he has experience in large construction projects for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and is now retired and wants to contribute to the community.

Michael Minckler wrote that he has lived on Northwest Federal Street, near the Deschutes River, for nearly 30 years, and has “a good perspective of Bend and the importance of Mirror Pond.”

Matt Schiffman owns Venable Auction House LLC in downtown Bend, just a couple of blocks from Mirror Pond. Schiffman wrote the pond is a centerpiece of culture for the city, and “it is the touchpoint for so many Central Oregon residents to international visitors.”

Jan Wick owns Avion Water Co. and in a letter to the ad hoc committee wrote that he served “over many years on a number of planning and user groups with respect to the management of the flows in the Deschutes River …” Wick wrote that he has experience working with entities such as the Oregon Water Resources Department, Trout Unlimited and the Deschutes River Conservancy.

Foster Fell wrote that his bachelor’s degree in soil science and his experience assessing stream habitat provide him with valuable expertise for the committee.

Ed Boero owns Cascade Advisory Group Inc., an investment firm, and wrote in a letter to the park district that the community needs to decide soon how to manage Mirror Pond because the cost will only increase in the future. “Although I currently do not have a strong opinion on the best course of action, I fully realize that Mirror Pond and the Deschutes River are iconic symbols of our community,” Boero wrote.

Craig Coyner was mayor of Bend in 1984, the last time the community dredged sediment from Mirror Pond. Coyner wrote that he has historical knowledge of Mirror Pond and experience writing legal contracts.

Matt Shinderman is a member of the Mirror Pond Steering Committee, which has also reviewed options to manage the pond. Shinderman is also a board member of the civic group Bend 2030. Betsy Warriner, president of the Bend 2030 board of directors, wrote that “as a member of the OSU-Cascades faculty, Matt specializes in environmental policy, sustainability, ecological assessment of urban landscapes, and ecological restoration.”

Mirror Pond Project Manager Jim Figurski said city and parks officials have not yet scheduled the next meeting of the Mirror Pond ad hoc committee.

“We’re really waiting for the resolution of some of those discussions with Pacific Power,” Figurski said. “That’s going to happen the first part of October.”

The next committee meeting might be as soon as mid-October, and Figurski said the agenda will include a discussion of applicants for openings on the committee. The goal is that after the Pacific Power meetings, officials will have the information necessary to make decisions about the future of Mirror Pond, Figurski said.

“My personal hope as a project manager is that we can keep this moving so that we don’t lose the momentum that’s been created with the project so far,” Figurski said.

Source: The Bulletin ©2013

Posted by the MirrorPond.info editor.

Terms of Services

The mission of MirrorPond.info is to support the Old Bend Neighborhood Association (OBNA) in fulfilling its duties and to further educate the community for the benefit of the neighborhood. Through its websites, the OBNA offers broad public access to a wide range of information, including historical materials that may contain offensive language or negative stereotypes. Such materials must be viewed in the context of the relevant time period. The OBNA does not endorse the views expressed in such materials.

General Disclaimer

Materials published on this website are intended for reference use only, do not constitute legal advice, and may not represent the official opinion of the Old Bend Neighbors.

We also link to other organizations’ websites when there is a reason to do so. These links are being provided as a convenience and for informational purposes only; they do not constitute an endorsement or an approval by the OBNA of any of the products, services or opinions of the corporation or organization or individual. The OBNA bears no responsibility for the accuracy, legality or content of the external site or for that of subsequent links. Contact the external site for answers to questions regarding its content.

Security

For site security and to ensure that this service remains available to all users, this computer system employs software programs to monitor network traffic to identify unauthorized attempts to upload or change information, deny service, otherwise cause damage or access non-public information. Unauthorized attempts to upload information or change information are strictly prohibited and may be punishable under the United States criminal code (18 U.S.C. 1030). Information regarding possible violations of law may be provided to law enforcement officials.

We reserves the right to block IP addresses that fail to honor the our robots.txt files or submit requests at a rate that negatively impacts service delivery to all website patrons. Current guidelines recommend that software programs submit a total of no more than 10 requests per minute to our website or Facebook application, regardless of the number of machines used to submit requests.

About Copyright and this Collection

Whenever possible, this website provides factual information about copyright owners and related matters in the records, videos, articles, and other texts that accompany this collection. As a compiler of this collection, the OBNA generally does not own rights in the collection. Therefore, it does not charge permission fees for use of such material and generally does not grant or deny permission to publish or otherwise distribute material in this collection. Permission and possible fees may be required from the copyright owner independently of this website and the OBNA. It is the researcher’s obligation to determine and satisfy copyright or other use restrictions when publishing or otherwise distributing materials found in this collection. Transmission or reproduction of protected items beyond that allowed by fair use requires the written permission of the copyright owners. Researchers must make their own assessments of rights in light of their intended use.

If you have any more information about an item you’ve seen on our website or if you are the copyright owner and believe our website has not properly attributed your work to you or have used it beyond what is allowed by fair use, we want to hear from you. Please contact mirror.pond@oldbend.org with your contact information and a link to the relevant content.

View more information about copyright law from the U.S. Copyright Office

Privacy and Publicity Rights

Privacy and publicity rights reflect separate and distinct interests from copyright interests. Anyone desiring to use materials from this website bear the responsibility of making individualized determinations as to whether privacy and publicity rights are implicated by the nature of the materials and how they use such materials.

While copyright protects the copyright holder’s property rights in the work or intellectual creation, privacy and publicity rights protect the interests of the person(s) who may be the subject(s) of the work or intellectual creation. Issues pertaining to privacy and publicity may arise when a researcher contemplates the use of letters, diary entries, photographs or reportage in visual, audio, and print formats found in library collections. Because two or more people are often involved in the work (e.g., photographer and subject, interviewer and interviewee) and because of the ease with which various media in digital format can be reused, photographs, audio files, and motion pictures represent materials in which issues of privacy and publicity emerge with some frequency.

The distinctions among privacy rights, publicity rights, and copyright are best illustrated by example: An advertiser wishes to use a photograph for a print advertisement. The advertiser approaches the photographer, who holds the copyright in the photograph, and negotiates a license to use the photograph. The advertiser also is required to determine the relationship between the photographer and the subject of the photograph. If no formal relationship (e.g., a release form signed by the subject) exists that permits the photographer to license the use of the photograph for all uses or otherwise waives the subject’s, sitter’s or model’s rights, then the advertiser must seek permission from the subject of the photograph because the subject has retained both privacy and publicity rights in the use of their likeness. The publicity right of the subject is that their image may not be commercially exploited without his/her consent and potentially compensation.

While copyright is a federally protected right under the United States Copyright Act, with statutorily described fair use defenses against charges of copyright infringement, neither privacy nor publicity rights are the subject of federal law. Note also that while fair use is a defense to copyright infringement, fair use is not a defense to claims of violation of privacy or publicity rights. Privacy and publicity rights are the subject of state laws. What may be permitted in one state may not be permitted in another. Note also that related causes of action may be pursued under the federal Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125 (a), for example, for unauthorized uses of a person’s identity in order to create a false endorsement.

While an individual’s right to privacy generally ends when the individual dies, publicity rights associated with the commercial value connected with an individual’s name, image or voice may continue. For example, many estates or representatives of famous authors, musicians, actors, photographers, politicians, sports figures, celebrities, and other public figures continue to control and license the uses of those figures’ names, likenesses, etc.

Although the risks for using an image in a periodical’s “editorial” pages may be less than for use in advertising or for other commercial purposes, the risk can still be high if the person depicted is held up to ridicule or presented in a libelous manner. While it is true that famous or public figures who seek recognition have thereby surrendered some privacy, they may have the right to control the commercial use of their image (likeness, voice, signature, etc.). This principle recognizes that a celebrity’s image can be an asset in trade.

About Our Web Surveys

This website uses various types of online forms and surveys to collect opinions and feedback from a random sample of visitors. All information you submit is voluntary.

If you get the survey pop-up request, please consider completing it for us. Thank you for your time and comments.

Source: Terms of Service