Editorials from around Oregon

Selected editorials from Oregon newspapers:

_____

The (Eugene) Register-Guard, Dec. 27, on spotting “fake news”

A student-developed online plug-in idea, Open Mind, offers some hope in the war against “fake news.”

Because one person’s definition of fake news can differ wildly with another’s, of course, don’t expect this to be a quick fix that will appease folks on both sides of the political spectrum. And because any such tool inevitably will be built with human bias of some sort, it’s bound to come with flaws.

Still, it’s an intriguing counter to the increasingly annoying - and dangerous - trend of made-up news being passed off as the real thing.

Developed recently in a 36-hour “hackathon” at Yale University, the Open Mind plug-in - a software component that adds a specific feature to an existing program - is designed to be something of a smoke alarm to alert a user if he or she enters a web site known to disseminate fake news. What’s more, it can alert readers if a story shared on social media is fake or biased.

But it doesn’t stop there. It’s designed to not only warn readers of fake-news danger, but to point them toward alternative viewpoints.

Designed as an extension for Google’s Chrome browser, it uses existing “sentiment analysis technology” - a process to discern the emotional tone behind a series of words. It can gain an understanding of the attitudes, opinions and emotions expressed - to identify subjects and political slants. If Open Mind discerns a decidedly anti-Trump piece, the software could suggest to the reader stories on the president with an alternative viewpoint.

Finally, over time, the software can build a data base that shows whether the user has been reading stories from only one side of the political spectrum.

“The solution is to develop a kind of auto-immune system,” said Alex Cui, an undergraduate at the California Institute of Technology and one of the four students on the Open Mind team.

As it is, there’s little overlap in the news sources that liberals and conservatives use regularly, and trust. Forty-seven percent of “consistent conservatives” get the bulk of their news from Fox News, according to a 2014 Pew Research Center study; half of “consistent liberals” get their news from a combination of NPR, CNN, MSNBC and The New York Times.

Among the ideas of Open Mind is to get people out of their habit of associating on social media only with people who share their viewpoints and of reading biased news skewered toward their beliefs. “Social media sites grow bubbles,” said Michael Lopez-Brau, a doctoral student at Yale and member of the Open Mind team. “They’ve allowed us to silo people off at a distance.”

Ironically, one of the biggest challenges developers will confront as they create this plug-in is not allowing their own biases to skew the program. And once it’s built, the challenge will be to get the people who need it most to use it. As with Apple’s app aimed at getting people to not text and drive, it works only for those who agree to use it. Often, pride coerces those who need broader vision to not look beyond their familiar world views.

That said, bravo to the students for their imaginative thinking - and with the 36-hour-clock ticking no less. What’s as impressive as their ability to think on their feet is their tackling two problems as serious as anything America has faced in a long time: narrow-mindedness and truth.

____

East Oregonian, Dec. 26, on Oregon protecting its agriculture zoning rules

A land use fight is shaping up in Southern Oregon’s Douglas County that pits the broader interests of agriculture against the interests of urban developers - and perhaps the interests of specific land owners who might want to sell.

Douglas County commissioners are considering changing the designation of nearly 35,000 acres in farm and forest zones to “non-resource transitional lands.” That would allow up to 2,300 20-acre home sites to be carved out of land now reserved for agriculture and timber harvests.

According to the county, the sites are of low quality for commercial farm production and taken together represent only about 1 percent of farm and forestland in the county.

They speculate that no more than half the lots would ever be developed.

The county contends that current zoning doesn’t support the demand for “rural lifestyle” dwellings.

It’s unclear who is clamoring for these types of properties, but it’s a safe bet there would be demand from wealthy retirees and out-of-towners looking for vacation properties to take advantage of the area’s good weather and scenic beauty.

Not so fast. State land use regulators and farmland preservation advocates are concerned by the proposal.

Advocates at 1,000 Friends of Oregon say the county hasn’t proven the need for more rural housing stock and is pulling a fast one by misapplying authority it’s granted under Oregon’s land use laws to meet its objectives.

Oregon’s Department of Land Conservation and Development shares some of the group’s concerns.

As in many of these land use issues, we are conflicted.

We have always maintained that private property owners should generally be allowed to use their land for the purpose that provides the highest return. For an owner, land suited for only marginal crop production might well be worth more as a sizable plot for a “rural lifestyle” dwelling.

At the same time, we know that once truly productive farmland is used for something other than farming, the soil is often lost forever to agricultural production. Significant loss of production leads to a loss of infrastructure that supports farming - storage, processing, packing, transportation. And that hurts farmers with otherwise viable operations.

We haven’t heard much from the people who own the land, which is scattered around the various cities in the county. That could explain the county’s low estimate of just how much of this land could ever go on the block.

Willing buyers need willing sellers.

Indications are good that this dispute will end up with the state Land Use Board of Appeals.

We’d like to know, on a plot-by-plot basis, the true productive potential of the land. Is any of it improperly categorized?

That question is moot if the county is exceeding its authority.

Anyone hoping to pull up stakes in favor of a prime “rural lifestyle” dwelling - perhaps someday here in Eastern Oregon - will have to wait for these issues to be resolved.

____

The Oregonian/OregonLive, Dec. 23, on a higher standard for Oregon’s police

Eugene Police made the tough decision in concluding that Officer Charles Caruso, caught on videotape throwing a handcuffed man to the ground and punching him repeatedly, should be kicked off the police force. The city fired Caruso following an investigation into the September 2013 incident and paid $100,000 to the injured man.

But while Eugene Police decided Caruso wasn’t fit to be an officer for them, the state agency that trains and certifies officers was far gentler in making its own assessment. Despite a state investigator’s report finding that Caruso’s actions involved dishonesty, gross misconduct and other infractions, committee members and top administrators for the Department of Public Safety Standards and Training disagreed. They closed his case, in effect endorsing the notion that Caruso still met Oregon’s standards for being a police officer.

Unfortunately, that’s far from the only time that DPSST, which trains and certifies public safety workers, has shown such forgiving treatment to officers fired for cause by their police force, as The Oregonian/OregonLive’s Carli Brosseau and Rebecca Woolington documented in their report, “Fired, But Fit for Duty.” In fact, the agency’s refusal to revoke certifications for police officers fired by their employers for records of excessive force, drunkenness at work and incompetence in their job raises the question: Just how low does Oregon want to keep its standards for being a police officer?

A longstanding state law directs DPSST to revoke certifications for officers who are discharged for cause. But for decades, the agency has administratively narrowed the criteria for when such a termination should trigger an automatic revocation. The practice of greatly relying on criminal convictions to serve as the tipping point reflects a culture that seeks to protect police officers’ careers rather than the public.

In an interview with The Oregonian/OregonLive Editorial Board, DPSST director Eriks Gabliks defended his agency’s approach, contending that the department isn’t equipped to pass judgment on cases in which police officers are terminated for incompetence and use of force. He argues that such decisions are grounded in policies and procedures that vary among agencies, making it difficult to apply a single measuring stick for determining whether a person is so incompetent or forceful that he or she should lose their certification.

But cases like Caruso’s show that argument to be simply an excuse for staying on the sidelines. The officer’s actions were so egregious they triggered a six-figure payout to the injured man. What possible policy could protect the actions caught on videotape? How can the state agency in charge of upholding professional standards for law enforcement across the state not recognize the utter lack of professionalism - to say the least — in Caruso’s actions?

The agency hasn’t helped its case with its reflexive efforts to shut out scrutiny by the public and media. DPSST defended keeping work group meetings closed and sought repeatedly to block Brosseau and Woolington from accessing public records, but lost multiple appeals thanks to rulings by the Oregon attorney general’s office that endorsed disclosure.

The agency has made some changes in recent months. It now has the option to suspend certifications, a possibly more palatable alternative to revocation, and is adding a member of the public to the law enforcement-dominated Police Policy Committee. But there’s still a desperate need for leadership to make clear the state will enforce a high standard for its police officers.

So far, such leadership does not seem to be coming from Gov. Kate Brown, who failed to respond to repeated requests from Brosseau and Woolington about the agency’s troubling record. Considering that the governor appoints the director and board, Brown is in prime position to insist on greater accountability by the agency - if she chooses.

Others, however, are stepping up. Sen. Floyd Prozanski, D-Eugene, said he plans to convene hearings to determine whether the agency needs additional statutory authority to provide proper oversight. Marion County Sheriff Jason Myers, who chairs the DPSST board, told the Editorial Board he plans to begin a conversation about reviewing use-of-force cases, despite Gabliks’ hesitance to get involved. And Oregon State Police Superintendent Travis Hampton, who also serves on the board, told Brosseau and Woolington that he thinks some of the officers featured in the report should have lost their certifications for good.

But until there are clear, articulated changes, the public should put their faith and support behind officers like Lt. Scott McKee of the Springfield Police and Sgt. Matt Swanson of the Clackamas County Sheriff’s Office. The two men have pushed for greater accountability from their fellow officers. McKee conducted the criminal investigation into Caruso and Swanson blew the whistle on a former detective who failed to conduct the most basic of investigations on multiple cases, including child sex assault reports. Both officers have shown more pride in what their profession stands for than the agency charged with upholding it.

Gabliks emphasized to the Editorial Board that most Oregon police officers are committed professionals striving to do their best for the public. We agree. That’s why it’s so critical to root out those who jeopardize our trust.

____

Baker City Herald, Dec. 22, on Anthony’s big boost

Lest anyone believe it is always quixotic to even try to influence the federal government, we cite the case of several Forest Service campgrounds near Baker City.

Although the lobbying effort in this case included some high-profile aid - a letter from U.S. Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore. - it started as a purely local effort.

And more importantly, it yielded results.

The story that led to the Forest Service awarding a five-year contract to a local company to manage two campground complexes dates back to December 2016. In that month the Forest Service awarded the contract to Aud & Di Campground Services, the Utah firm that had the previous five-year contract for that work.

But one of the other applicants - the Baker County Development Corporation, the nonprofit that owns the Anthony Lakes Ski Area - appealed the contract award. That’s when Wyden wrote his letter to the agency’s chief forester for the Pacific Northwest.

That official rescinded the decision and reopened the application process.

Given a second chance, Anthony Lakes Mountain Resort LLC prevailed, and earlier this month it won the five-year contract, starting in 2018.

This was a gratifying result - but not only, or even mainly, because it shows that federal officials can be persuaded.

Rather, we’re pleased because it’s sensible to award the contract to Anthony Lakes. Moreover, it’s a decision that gives a boost to the local economy that’s modest in the short term but could be more substantial farther in the future.

John Wilson, president of the Baker County Development Corporation, said the five-year contract not only will allow the company to hire at least six full-time employees, but it will help bolster plans to expand its business model to a truly year-round operation. That’s exciting because it could yield tangible benefits for other businesses that also rely on visitors.

The logic of the decision is almost too obvious - the ski area is literally within sight of two of the three campgrounds that make up one of the two complexes in the Forest Service contract.

Although Anthony Lakes has not managed campgrounds, we’re confident that, having operated a chairlift, it’s up to the task of dealing with picnic tables and outhouses.

____

The (Roseburg) News-Review, Dec. 20, on the Douglas County Veterans Forum’s vote of no confidence

Three weeks ago, the Douglas County Veterans Forum issued a vote of no confidence against Dinesh Ranjan, the chief of surgery at the Roseburg Veterans Affairs Medical Center.

We couldn’t agree more with how that vote ended up.

The vote, which ended up becoming a unanimous call for Ranjan’s resignation, removal or reassignment, was the result of an overwhelming number of complaints filed by VA employees, issues with colonoscopies - a pretty routine practice - and a steady stream of retaliation complaints by current and former VA employees.

The vote isn’t unprecedented. In 2014, the forum called for the resignation of three top VA officials, including director Carol Bogedain. About a month later, she stepped down. But the vote is a powerful expression of how the county’s veterans feel about the current situation. The forum represents 21 veteran groups and about 5,000 local veterans.

Over the past few months, The News-Review has featured several gut-wrenching, confusing and downright strange situations involving alleged mismanagement. The forum, it seems, has been hearing the same stories.

In a statement, representatives of the forum said, “We believe permitting the Chief of Surgery to continue in his position will continue to degrade VA employees’ morale and thus affect their merciful and diligent care giving.”

That’s about as strong and as clear as a call for removal can be.

We do, however, have one disagreement with the forum.

Representatives said the forum remains confident in the work Director Doug Paxton is doing to bring about positive change at the VA. In a statement, the forum’s representatives said, “Paxton has fostered open and honest communications with the veteran community which is admired and appreciated.”

While it may be true that Paxton himself is capable of having healthy conversations, his ability to hold other managers accountable isn’t anything to brag about.

Holding other managers accountable is what directors are supposed to do.

Simply ask Laura Follett, a 15-year Navy veteran, who alleged she was fired from the VA for refusing to bend the rules.

“Mr. Paxton is the captain of his ship, and ultimately he is responsible for what’s going on,” she said.

We couldn’t agree more.