Coos County Watchdog


  • Home >>>
    • About Us
    • Contact Us
    • Links
    • Whistle-Blower’s Page
  • Blog >>>
    • Info Blogs
  • Issues >>>
    • Johnson Creek Dam
    • Jury Nullification >
      • Jury Nullification on Facebook
    • More Choices in Bandon
    • NO Bandon Marsh Expansion >
      • Bandon Marsh Expansion on Facebook
    • Second Amendment Sanctuary Ordinance >
      • S.A.S.O on FB
    • State of Jefferson >
      • State of Jefferson on Facebook
    • The Coos County Charter
    • Urban Renewal Information

OFF ~ The Oregon Firearms Federation urges a "NO" vote on Measure 101

12/28/2017

Comments

 
Picture
12.28.17

You might be wondering why OFF would take a position on a tax measure. Bear with us and we'll explain.

No matter what your personal feelings are about a liberal policy that fines you if you don't have health insurance and taxes you if you do, no matter if you can afford to add an "assessment " to your already staggering health insurance premiums, no matter if you are willing to overlook a misleading ballot title and an election date that was engineered by liberals in Salem to undermine the voting process, this measure will have a profound effect on your gun rights in 2018 and beyond.

Here is why.

While the "short" session held in even numbered years was sold to us as simply a way to deal with urgent budget issues, it is anything but. There are no limits to the issues, no matter how complex, that can be voted on in short sessions.

We have seen over and over how votes are taken on issues that have not been adequately studied and examined. Measures are rushed through the legislature with little opportunity for public input and little time for legislators to fully understand the ramification of their votes.

The anti-gun majority in Salem has made no secret of their intention to continue their assaults on your gun rights, and thanks to out of state billionaires, they have the votes to do it.

Pro liberty forces are outspent 10-1 by money coming from New York anti-gun extremist, Mike Bloomberg. That kind of money buys a lot of incompetence, and a lot of anti-gun votes.(It's interesting to note that local anti-gun groups contribute only tiny amounts of money to local candidates demonstrating how weak their grass roots actually are.)

So what does all this have to do with a tax on health insurance? Simple. The same anti-gun leftists who rammed through bills to make it a crime to safeguard a firearm for a friend (SB 941) and to allow confiscations of firearms with no accusation of a crime and no due process (SB 719) are the same ones who are pushing for taxes on one of your most expensive needs, health insurance.

They want this money to fund their pet projects, even though over and over we have seen them squander millions through ineptitude and cronyism and a clear inability to deal with any matter concerning health care. If they are able to keep this windfall they will have very little to occupy their time except more gun control.

Governor Kate Brown and House Majority leader Jennifer Williamson have both publicly stated that they plan to use the short session to ram through more gun restrictions.


"If voters affirm the funding plan, though, Williamson has other priorities that she may have time to press, including making another push for increased restrictions on gun ownership.
Oregon Gov. Kate Brown, a fellow Democrat, renewed her support for further restricting gun ownership in the wake of the October shooting at a country music festival in Las Vegas."
Portland Tribune Oct 31 2017 

As you know, they are both recipients of massive donations from Mike Bloomberg and are committed to doing his bidding. So you can see, if the Democrats get to keep this money, they will have little to keep them busy except to work on additional attacks on your rights.

We strongly urge you to keep them busy with other things and vote "no" on Measure 101.

OFF wishes you and yours a happy and free New Year and thanks you for your support fighting for freedom.

Related Posts:
Oregon Firearms Federation ~ Protect Your Rights For Free!
OFF ~ NRA CAVES AGAIN ~ 719 REPEAL EFFORT FALLS SHORT
Information on Several Petitions Currently in Circulation in the State of Oregon
OFF ~ The Gun Confiscation Battle Begins
Teri Grier ~ Bill Post ~ Mike Nearman ~ File Referendum on SB719 Gun Confiscation
The Differences Between SB719A & Connecticut's Gun Confiscation Law
LTE ~ SB719 Into the Oven, Out of the Stack
Oregon Firearms Federation Responds to Senator Brian Boquist on SB 719
OFF Late Session Omnibus Anti-Gun Bill Introduced
Senator Arnie Roblan Votes for SB917A The Gun Confiscation Bill ~ Now in House
OFF ~ CALL TO ACTION ~ Contact Senator Prozanski ~ Time to Fix SB941 
OFF ~ Bad Idea Becomes Bad Bill SB 868

Comments

Coos County Press Release ~ WANTED: Fair Board Members Apply by January 12,

12/20/2017

Comments

 
Picture
December 20, 2017
PRESS RELEASE
The Coos County Board of Commissioners will be accepting applications from persons interested in applying for a position on the Coos County Fair Board; there are 2 positions to fill.
The successful applicants would each serve a term of 3 years.

Interested parties must send a completed county application to:
Coos County Board of Commissioners Office
250 N. Baxter
Coquille, Oregon 97423
Applications are available on the county’s website at www.co.coos.or.us and click on "county boards and committees" or by contacting the Board’s office. Deadline for submitting an application is Friday, January 12 at noon. Applicants should be available for interviews as soon as the following week.

Bobbi Brooks
Businesss Operations Manager
Coos County Board of Commissioners
(541) 396-7535
bbrooks@co.coos.or.us
http://www.co.coos.or.us


Comments

CCURA Public Hearing TODAY December 13, at 3pm in the Owen Building

12/13/2017

Comments

 
The following meeting will be held in the Owen Building at 3:00pm.  It was advertised on the Port of Coos Bay website for 1:30pm, but that is the incorrect time.  It has been changed, but if the Port Director cannot schedule a meeting should the commissioners be giving him access to $37 million dollars. 


December 13, 2017 REVISED SPECIAL MEETINGS NOTICE COOS COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS The Coos County Board of Commissioners has scheduled or will attend the following meetings during the period of December 11 through December 15, 2017: Wednesday, December 13: 10:00 AM worksession- Insurance Premiums- room 121 3:00 PM Continuation of Hearing on Urban Renewal Plan Amendment- Owen Building large conference room

Coos County Public Hearing on Extending the Urban Renewal Tax Debt Dec. 13, 2017


Comments

Coos County Public Hearing on Extending the Urban Renewal Tax Debt Dec. 13, 2017

12/11/2017

Comments

 
Picture
The Coos County Commissioners will be holding a
public hearing on December 13th 2017, at 3:00 PM.

The meeting will be held in the
Owens Building at 225 N Adams St, Coquille, OR 97423. 


2017 Some of the Meeting Documents

2017-12-13 Proposed Updated CCURA Plan Amendment November 22, 2017
File Size: 2542 kb
File Type: pdf
Download File

2017-12-13 Report on Proposed Updated CCURA Plan Amendment November 22, 2017
File Size: 611 kb
File Type: pdf
Download File

2017-12-13 Updated Urban Renewal Information Coos County
File Size: 107 kb
File Type: pdf
Download File

 AM-17-005 Urban Renewal
North Bay Renewal Agency District Report
North Bay Urban Renewal Plan Amendment
North Bay Urban Renewal Plan as Amended
12/05/17 Memo to the BOC

Picture

The Continuing Saga of the Coos County Urban Renewal Agency

 FB page dedicated to shutting down the Coos County Urban Renewal Agency
www.facebook.com/ShutDowntheCoosCountyURA/
Related Posts:
The Excesses of Tax-Increment Financing & Urban Renewal
Coos Bay URA Spends $300,000 on North-South Gateway While Streets Deteriorate
Coos Bay Street Action Plan Open House Thursday, June 8, 2017, 5:30pm
Coos Bay Legally Steals from Average Citizens to Decorate a Private Business
Coos Bay Taking from the Poor to Give to the Privileged Using Urban Renewal
Coos Bay Gives $97,000 of Public Money to the Local Drama Club
Coos Bay Redistributing Money to Owners of Historical Places
Coos Bay Giving Away Public Money to a Private Business Using Urban Renewal
CATO Policy Analysis #676 ~ The Case Against Tax-Increment Financing
Public Comment Due BY December 1, 2017 on Coos County Urban Renewal Agency
The Continuing Saga of the Coos County Urban Renewal Agency
Coos County Board of Commissioners FINAL VOTE on Extending the URA Debt
Information on the Campaign to Shut Down the North Bay URA
Coos County Proposed Ordinance Adopting North Bay UR Plan ~ FOREVER
Coos County Commissioners Hearing on Extending the Debt of the North Bay URA
Cribbins & Sweet Utilize Voter Suppression on Urban Renewal Extension  
PERS Task Force Recommends Exempting School Districts from Urban Renewal
List of Coos Bay’s Urban Renewal Expenditures from 2006 - 2012
LTE ~ Coos Bay Urban Renewal Giving Away Public Assets Paid for by The Public
#CoosBay Urban Renewal Monies Siphoned from Public Basic Services 
Port of #CoosBay Blowing Through Your Tax Dollars Like Drunken Sailors 
Commissioners Campaign Contributors are Champions of Corporate Welfare

Comments

The Excesses of Tax-Increment Financing & Urban Renewal

12/4/2017

Comments

 
Picture
The Excesses of Tax-Increment Financing & Urban Renewal
 
Sex scandals aside, taxes are the biggest issue on the table right now, which is understandable when most families are spending more on taxes than they do on housing, food, and clothing combined.  Most people think they are paying too much due to the overspending of government, so it makes sense to shrink the budget.
 
There never seems to be enough revenue for education, infrastructure, and public safety, so eliminating the process of tax-increment financing would stop Urban Renewal Agencies from siphoning money from those and other overlapping taxing districts that provide those services. 
 
According to data collected from the “OR Property Tax Annual Statistics FY 2016-2017” found on the Oregon Department of Revenue’s website, there are 77 Urban Renewal Agencies in the state that manage 113 areas/districts.  Those UR agencies received $223.3-million from the “Revenue from Excess,” while others received an additional $21.1-million from special levies totaling $244.4-million that was diverted from other various taxing districts or directly from the taxpayers.  The revenue from property taxes going to Urban Renewal through the TIF process in FY 2009-2010 was $182-million.
 
“Revenue from Excess,” is the property tax revenue generated by increased property values inside the UR area over the frozen increment when the authorities enacted the plan for the district.  Without the TIF process, the other districts that overlap the UR area would retain that money.  
 
Statewide in FY 2016-2017, Public education lost $87.2-million in potential revenue because of urban renewal activity. Cities lost $73.3-million in that same fiscal year, and counties lost $41.5-million, which includes the $28.2-million taken from Multnomah County alone.  Other districts, including Fire Districts, lost $21.3-million. 
 
Those totals do not include the maintenance of the unfunded projects built with the redirected money.  
 
Politicians use urban renewal funding as seed money to create new taxing districts, or they use tax dollars from existing districts to maintain unnecessary projects at the expense of necessary amenities. Those projects include auditoriums, carousels, conservation easements, convention centers, decorations, estuaries, murals, racetracks, swimming pools, sports stadiums, sculptures, street art, and theaters, which take money directly from colleges, roads, schools, police and fire departments.
 
The idea of redevelopment is to increase the assessed values of property surrounding and within the urban renewal area by artificially inflating the local tax base using public money---all to generate new economic activity that most likely would have taken place with or without public incentives.  It just may not have happened in the area desired by the urban renewal planner but in a place chosen by the private business owner, which alleviates the taxpayers of the financial risk. 
 
Some independent studies have found little evidence that municipalities with Urban Renewal Agencies developed any faster than cities without these programs did.  In fact, one study titled “The Effects of Tax Increment Financing on Economic Development” written in March of 1999 by two professors of economics, Richard F. Dye, and David E. Merriman, it found TIF areas grew slower than areas without it did.  Quote, “If the use of tax increment financing spurs economic development that would not have happened but for the public expenditures, we would expect (after controlling for other growth determinants and for self-selection) a positive relationship between TIF adoption and growth. If the use of tax increment financing merely moves capital around within a municipality, relocating improvements from non-TIF areas of the town to within TIF district borders without changing the productivity of that capital, we would expect (after appropriate controls) to find a zero relationship between TIF adoption and growth. What we find, however, is a negative relationship between TIF adoption and growth. This is consistent with the hypothesis that government subsidies reallocate property improvements in such a way that capital is less productive in its new location.
 
A Senior Fellow at the CATO Institute made the case against urban renewal and tax-increment financing in a policy analysis titled, “The Case against Tax-Increment Financing” by Randal O’Toole.  In the paper, he states, “There are two problems with any attempts to reform TIF. First, no matter how much legislatures may try to focus TIF on genuine examples of blighted neighborhoods, cities will find ways to get around such safeguards. Second, there is little evidence that city gov­ernments are better than private developers at determining the type and location of new development that cities need, and plenty of evidence that they are not as good. Instead of reforming TIF, state legislatures should sim­ply repeal the laws that give cities and coun­ties the authority to use it and similar tools to subsidize economic development.”
 
The politicians intentionally design these types of development schemes to centralize power and money for the utilization of government planners.  Oregon legislators both Democrat and Republican ignore the annual loss of revenue, especially to education, so they can continue the excessiveness of constructing nonessential boondoggles of the future because it benefits the special interest of both parties today.    
 
About the author: 
Rob Taylor is the tentative Chief Petitioner for the “Committee to Shut Down the Coos County URA.”  Go to CoosCountyWatchdog.com for more information.

The Excesses of Tax-Increment Financing & Urban Renewal

Related Posts:
Coos Bay URA Spends $300,000 on North-South Gateway While Streets Deteriorate
Coos Bay Street Action Plan Open House Thursday, June 8, 2017, 5:30pm
Coos Bay Legally Steals from Average Citizens to Decorate a Private Business
Coos Bay Taking from the Poor to Give to the Privileged Using Urban Renewal
Coos Bay Gives $97,000 of Public Money to the Local Drama Club
Coos Bay Redistributing Money to Owners of Historical Places
Coos Bay Giving Away Public Money to a Private Business Using Urban Renewal
CATO Policy Analysis #676 ~ The Case Against Tax-Increment Financing
Public Comment Due BY December 1, 2017 on Coos County Urban Renewal Agency
The Continuing Saga of the Coos County Urban Renewal Agency
Coos County Board of Commissioners FINAL VOTE on Extending the URA Debt
Information on the Campaign to Shut Down the North Bay URA
Coos County Proposed Ordinance Adopting North Bay UR Plan ~ FOREVER
Coos County Commissioners Hearing on Extending the Debt of the North Bay URA
Cribbins & Sweet Utilize Voter Suppression on Urban Renewal Extension  
PERS Task Force Recommends Exempting School Districts from Urban Renewal
List of Coos Bay’s Urban Renewal Expenditures from 2006 - 2012
LTE ~ Coos Bay Urban Renewal Giving Away Public Assets Paid for by The Public
#CoosBay Urban Renewal Monies Siphoned from Public Basic Services 
Port of #CoosBay Blowing Through Your Tax Dollars Like Drunken Sailors 
Commissioners Campaign Contributors are Champions of Corporate Welfare

Comments

Coos County Clerk News Media Election Notice for Special Election on Tax Increase

12/4/2017

Comments

 
Picture

Vote NO on Health Care Tax Measure 101

https://oregoncatalyst.com/40334-vote-health-care-tax-measure-101.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+OregonCatalyst+%28The+Oregon+Catalyst%29

Comments

Coos Bay URA Spends $300,000 on North-South Gateway While Streets Deteriorate

12/4/2017

Comments

 

South Gateway Project on Highway 101

Estimated Completion Date on Dec. 30, 2017

Picture
Coos Bay’s Urban Renewal Agency has a desire to improve the eye appeal of the Highway 101 streetscape within the City limits. In 2016, the Agency engaged the services of GreenWorks, a Portland-based landscape architectural and urban design firm, to prepare renderings for streetscape concepts throughout the Highway 101 corridor in Coos Bay. The streetscape concepts were presented to the Agency in 2016. The ideas included both a basic concept for landscaping along with the fence railing theme that matches the recently completed railing project between the rail museum and Front Street.  

While there are a number of areas identified for streetscape improvements along Highway 101, the Agency chose to start with improvements to the two-existing City entry monument locations. The north entry is near the existing "Welcome to Coos Bay" monument sign on the west side of Highway 101 (just north of the ACE Hardware store). The south entry project area involves the "island" on Highway 101. just south of the Shell service station and across the street from Fred Myers. The Agency has entered into a contract with Clean Rivers Erosion Control, a local company, to undertake the designed streetscape improvements. Work was started on the south entrance project area. The contractor has completed the site prep and they are now installing new curbs and gutters, planter divider walls, signposts for the new “Welcome to Coos Bay” sign, and fence posts, etc. 


Picture
Urban Renewal Agency Minutes - January 5, 2016
Consideration of Approval of Highway 101 Streetscape Renderings
Public Works Director Jim Hossley stated over the last several months the Urban Renewal
Agency had reviewed various ideas and renderings for the Highway 101 streetscape. The City engaged the services of Greenworks to prepare the renderings for the streetscape along Highway 101 throughout the City. The rendered options were geographically grouped into the South, Central, and North. The latest renderings included the addition of the "is land" near the south entry into the City. The renderings also carried the fence railing theme that matched the recently completed railing project between the Railway museum and Front Street. Board Member Shoji suggested the Agency needed to set a plan to involve the public on the "Welcome to Coos Bay" signs; expressed concern about new expenditures noting the flag project was unfinished. City Manager Craddock advised deficiencies on the Boardwalk needed to be addressed before the flag poles were replaced; suggested the Agency could set a plan to include the public. Board Member Vaughan suggested streetscape six was not realistic; should incorporate plants to help stabilize the hillside and combat invasive species; was not in favor of including "rotten logs" along the highway. Board Member Kramer moved to approve the concept renderings. Board Member Brick seconded the motion which passed with Chair Groth and Board Members Brick, Kramer, Shoji, and Vaughan voting aye. Board Members Daily and Leahy were absent.

Picture
Coos Bay Urban Renewal Agency Minutes - September 19, 2017
Approval of Streetscape Construction Bid

Public Works and Community Development Director Jim Hossley stated over the past two years, the Urban Renewal Agency reviewed various ideas and renderings for the Highway 101 streetscape. The goal was to improve the appeal of the Highway 101 streetscape from the south to north city limits. The streetscape improvements would be restricted to Highway 101 right-of way (ROW) and City owned property. Due to funding constraints, efforts on the project focused on the two existing entry monument locations.
 
Based on early cost estimates, staff budgeted $175,000 in this year's Downtown Capital Projects Fund Urban Renewal budget for the streetscape projects at the entry monument locations. After completion of the construction documents, the design consultant estimated the total construction cost to be $225,071. The project was advertised for bid, and the City received one bid from Clean Rivers Erosion Control for a total cost of $249,999. Mr. Hossley noted there was a $75,000 shortfall in the budget relative to the bid price, but there were adequate funds in the Urban Renewal Downtown Capital Projects Fund to cover the bid price plus a contingency.

Urban Renewal Agency Minutes - September 19, 2017 21 
Mr. Hossley advised the proposed bid only covered the streetscape improvements and did not include the two entry signs and rockscaping . The estimated cost for signs was $32,000 and rockscaping was $10,000. Vice-Chair Marler expressed concern about the increased costs for the project.
 
Board Member Groth moved to award contract to Clean Rivers Erosion control for a cost of $249,999 plus a 10% contingency of $25,000 for a total cost of $274,999. Board Member Kilmer seconded the motion which carried. Ayes: Benetti, DiNovo, Farmer, Groth, Kilmer, Marler. Absent: Kramer.
Picture
BACKGROUND:
Over the past nearly two years, the Urban Renewal Agency has reviewed various ideas and renderings for the Highway 101 streetscape. The goal is to improve the eye appeal of the Highway 101 streetscape from the south to north City limits. The streetscape improvements would be restricted to Highway 101 right-of-way (ROW) and City owned property. City staff provided initial ideas for improvements. The City then engaged the services of Greenworks, a Portland based landscape architectural and urban design firm, to prepare renderings for streetscape concepts along Highway 101. After initial consideration of the first renderings, the Agency asked that efforts be focused on the two existing entry monument locations due to funding constraints. Additional areas would be addressed as funding becomes available. The north entry is in the vicinity of the existing “Welcome to Coos Bay” monument sign on the west side of Highway 101. The south entry concept includes the “island” in Highway 101 just south of the Shell service station. Greenworks presented ideas for the two entry monument locations to the Agency in early 2016. Their renderings provided a basic concept for landscaping and included the fence railing theme that matches the recently completed railing project between the rail museum and Front Street.

The Urban Renewal Agency then approved a contract with Greenworks to develop specific landscape plans for the City’s two gateway sites. The scope consisted of two tasks. Task 1 was preliminary design which resulted in a site plan. This plan depicted all new areas to be landscaped and included proposed locations for trees, plant beds, and ornamental pedestrian fence in a simplistic graphical format for review and approval by the Agency. Task 2 was for development of the construction documents. The consultant fee for completing both tasks was $27,016.50. The Agency reviewed the results of the Task 1 effort at a Work Session earlier this year

At the same time the streetscape activity was occurring, the City Council also considered a new City entrance monument logo. Council’s direction to the Logo Advisory Committee was to create a welcome sign logo including a tall ship theme. The current City Council stopped the new logo design effort in late 2016.

Based on early cost estimates, staff budgeted $175,000 in this fiscal year’s Urban Renewal Downtown Capital Projects Fund budget for the streetscape project. The design consultant, after completion of the construction documents this summer, estimated the total construction cost to be $225,071 (not including new monument signs). The project was advertised for bid, and the City received one bid. The bid was from Clean Rivers Erosion Control for a total cost of $249,999 (does not include monument signs). Note, the rock work behind the fence railing on the north entry is proposed to be done by separate contract. Due to the $75,000 shortfall in the budget relative to the bid price, it will be necessary to discuss possible alternatives or courses of action.

BUDGET IMPLICATIONS:
Based on early cost estimates, staff budgeted $175,000 in this year’s Urban Renewal Downtown Capital Projects Fund budget for the streetscape project. The design consultant, after completion of the construction documents this summer, estimated the total construction cost to be $225,071 (not including new monument signs). The project was advertised for bid, and the City received one bid. The bid was from Clean Rivers Erosion Control for a total cost of $249,999 (does not include monument signs). Note, the rock work behind the fence railing on the north entry is not in the bid and is proposed to be done by separate contract with a different contractor. There are adequate funds in the Downtown Project Fund (Fund 57) to cover the overage.

2016-01-05 Coos Bay URA Minutes
File Size: 529 kb
File Type: pdf
Download File

2017-09-19 Agenda URA Meeting
File Size: 122 kb
File Type: pdf
Download File

2017-09-19 Minutes URA Meeting
File Size: 294 kb
File Type: pdf
Download File

Related Posts:
Coos Bay Street Action Plan Open House Thursday, June 8, 2017, 5:30pm
Coos Bay Legally Steals from Average Citizens to Decorate a Private Business
Coos Bay Taking from the Poor to Give to the Privileged Using Urban Renewal
Coos Bay Gives $97,000 of Public Money to the Local Drama Club
Coos Bay Redistributing Money to Owners of Historical Places
Coos Bay Giving Away Public Money to a Private Business Using Urban Renewal
CATO Policy Analysis #676 ~ The Case Against Tax-Increment Financing
Public Comment Due BY December 1, 2017 on Coos County Urban Renewal Agency
The Continuing Saga of the Coos County Urban Renewal Agency
Coos County Board of Commissioners FINAL VOTE on Extending the URA Debt
Information on the Campaign to Shut Down the North Bay URA
Coos County Proposed Ordinance Adopting North Bay UR Plan ~ FOREVER
Coos County Commissioners Hearing on Extending the Debt of the North Bay URA
Cribbins & Sweet Utilize Voter Suppression on Urban Renewal Extension  
PERS Task Force Recommends Exempting School Districts from Urban Renewal
List of Coos Bay’s Urban Renewal Expenditures from 2006 - 2012
LTE ~ Coos Bay Urban Renewal Giving Away Public Assets Paid for by The Public
#CoosBay Urban Renewal Monies Siphoned from Public Basic Services 
Port of #CoosBay Blowing Through Your Tax Dollars Like Drunken Sailors 
Commissioners Campaign Contributors are Champions of Corporate Welfare


Comments

    Categories

    All
    A.F.P.
    Agenda 21
    Bandon
    B.I.A.
    B.L.M.
    Coos Bay
    Coos County
    Coos County
    Coquille
    County Charter
    Curry County
    C.W.A.
    Democratic Party
    D.E.Q.
    Eco Devo
    Eco Devo
    Economic Development
    Educational
    Elections
    E.P.A.
    F.D.A.
    F.E.M.A.
    Individual Rights
    I Spy Radio
    Jury Nullification
    Legislation
    Letter To Editor
    Mary Geddry
    N.D.A.A.
    News Wave
    N.O.A.A.
    North Bend
    O&C Land
    O.D.F.W.
    O.D.O.T.
    O.F.F.
    O.H.A.
    O.P.R.D.
    O.R.C. Mining
    O.W.E.B.
    P.E.R.S.
    Petitions
    Port Of Coos Bay
    Public Comments
    Public Events
    Regulation
    Republican Party
    S.A.O.V.A.
    State Of Jefferson
    The Bandon Marsh
    The Economy
    The Rob Taylor Report
    The Supreme Court
    The Tea Party
    Urban Renewal
    U.S.A.C.E.
    U.S.D.A.
    U.S.F.S
    U.S.F.W.S.

    Sign-Up Now to Stay Informed

    * indicates required

    View previous campaigns.

    Send Letters to:
    ​cooscountywatchdog@gmail.com​

    Disclaimer: Letters to the Editor and other opinions published in The Coos County Watchdog blog are not necessarily the views of the Editor, Publisher, or possible anyone else in their right mind.  The Watchdog reserves the right to edit, omit, or copy any and all submissions. 
    Letters to the Editor must be attributed with a name, address, and contact phone number. 

    WARNING:
    Political correctness is not practiced on this
    page & some content is inappropriate

    RSS Feed


    Archives

    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    July 2013
    June 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013
    March 2013
    February 2013
    January 2013
    December 2012
    November 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    August 2012
    July 2012
    June 2012
    May 2012
    April 2012
    March 2012
    February 2012
    January 2012
    December 2011
    November 2011
    October 2011
    September 2011
    August 2011

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.
Photo used under Creative Commons from DieselDemon