WSB Forum » Open Discussion

(71 posts)

There's rude, and then there's Ole-rude

  1. for anonyme

    The story thus far:

    ► Retarded (er . . . I mean "retired") baseball star builds million-dollar-view house in sightline of neighbor's beautiful tall tree.

    ► Baseball star realizes his mistake and asks neighbor (nicely of course) to cut down tree because it's blocking baseball star's million-dollar view.

    ► Neighbor demurs, saying that the tree was there first. And besides that, trees are kinda nice.

    ► Baseball star asks again, this time not so nicely.

    ► Once again, neighbor declines to cut.

    ► Baseball star appeals to local government, asking them to FORCE neighbor to cut down tree. Quotes Bible in support of his case against the tree.

    ► Other neighbors pig pile on tree lover, calling him selfish and a bad Christian.

    ► Board of Adjustment considers case, says it needs until November to mull it over.


    As for me, I don't need no three months to figure out the rights and wrongs on this one. And I don't need to consult no Bible, neither.

    However, I do have one question for the city officials:

    Whatchall smoking over there in Clyde Hill?

    Wood chips?

    Posted 3 years ago #         
  2. First world problems of the ridiculous sort. What a waste of time and money. What a "privileged", holier than thou attitude !

    Posted 3 years ago #         
  3. Yeah, and this neighbor let the Oleruds stay in his home, while the O's own home, that is suddenly blocked by a 50 year old tree, was being built.


    Posted 3 years ago #         
  4. 2 Much Whine
    Member Profile

    2 Much Whine

    Apparently God likes views over trees. . . .

    Posted 3 years ago #         
  5. This one baffles me. Seriously, you will not find a kinder, gentler more honest person than John Olerud. He is not your typical major league jerk. This guy makes Mr Rogers look like a rebel. That doesn't make him right, but something is missing from this story - it just has to be. I can't imagine him building without at least a "wink and a nod" that the tree would come down - but if he did? Shame on him.

    Posted 3 years ago #         
  6. >>something is missing from this story - it just has to be.

    It's the wood smoke, I'm tellin' ya. Stuff's got all kinds of pscyhoactive chemicals in it.

    Posted 3 years ago #         
  7. I understand both sides of the argument. What I don't understand was the lack of forethought? He LIVED on the property with the tree!! While he was building his CUSTOM home. If you know, with absolute certainty, that there is big, humongous, view obstructing tree (of the view you want to see) on the neighboring property . .. wouldn't you have addressed it earlier? Like immediately? Before you made your decisions?

    There has got to be more to the story. There usually is.

    Posted 3 years ago #         
  8. Well, there may indeed be more to this story, but as far as I'm concerned the most telling part is already in there. It's the part about how Olerud is trying to guilt-trip this guy into cutting his tree down. And who's he citing as an authority?

    Jesus Christ!

    No, I'm not swearing, people. "Jesus Christ" is the correct answer.

    Olerud's words:

    I'm just making the point that if you're willing to cut down your own trees to maintain your view and yet you aren't willing to offer that to your neighbor, how is that being a good neighbor?

    "The Bible says, 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul and strength, and your neighbor as yourself.' That's Jesus' commandment."

    Boy that's really the topper. Isn't that just the angel on top of this Christ-mas tree of a story?

    How this Olerud dude could call himself a Christian out of one side of his mouth and say something like that out the other is beyond me.

    Jesus was all about loving your neighbor, see? So that's why YOU should cut down YOUR tree to enhance the view from MY mansion. Yup. That's what Jesus would want YOU to do, neighbor. I'm sure of it.

    Excuse me Mr. Olerud . . . Do they have Cocoa Puffs on Planet Cuckoo? 'Cuz you're gonna need 'em.

    How could a person possibly twist Jesus' words so much without having them snap back in his own face?

    This is why I'll never be a Christian, folks. It's not that I don't want to be a good person and do right by God and all that. I do. I just can't bring myself to subscribe to any theology where people can interpret it the way John Olerud does while keeping a straight face.

    And he's not alone on Planet Cuckoo, either. Look at what that other fool-headed woman said.

    Just look!

    Nancy Dammkoehler, a neighbor who spoke at the hearing, said the Oleruds are reasonable people and scolded Baker: "All they want is to see the top of the Space Needle. If you can't figure this out, boy, I tell you, you'd better find a different line of work, buddy, because you're not very Christian."

    This lady must be another fat-cat "Christian" as well, though what good it's doing her troubled soul, I couldn't say.


    Think about this a second.
    Cogitate on it.

    John Olerud

    ► College Baseball Hall of Famer
    ► $20 million contract with the Mariners
    ► Wife and kids, the whole nine yards

    ► Still loved by millions, he retires after 17 seasons and builds himself a mansion in a uber-swanky enclave of an already swanky suburb

    But our hero's still not happy. No. Something's troubling him over there in Clyde Hill.

    Who could it be, John? Who's wrecking your early retirement?

    Let's see. You're a Christian, right? Maybe you're upset about all the havoc Satan is doing in the world.

    –Nope. Not Satan.

    Um. I know! Is it that socialist in the White House?

    –What, the dude from Kenya? Nope. Not him either.
    [ . . . ]  

    Is it . . . DBP?

    –Look, I just told you it wasn't Satan! Weren't you listening?

    Well, who is it then, John? For God's sake . . tell us!

    I'll tell ya who it is. It's that bastard across the street who won't cut his tree down so I can see the Space Needle!


    Posted 3 years ago #         
  9. I think Rev. Baker should hang a giant cross in his tree.

    Posted 3 years ago #         
  10. Rule #1 - Don't believe everything you read in the newspapers :-)

    Posted 3 years ago #         
  11. 365Stairs
    Member Profile

    365Stairs of the story is true...of course could something so mind boggling stupid even by today's standard be true...

    DBP...take it all back...

    Seattle Times...Print a Retraction...or get ready for a libel suit of biblical proportions...


    Posted 3 years ago #         
  12. I'd rather look at a tree than at the Space Needle, myself.

    I mean, there's nothing wrong with the Space Needle.

    But I like trees.

    Posted 3 years ago #         
  13. The tree IS the view.

    Posted 3 years ago #         
  14. B-squared
    Member Profile


    My thoughts exactly, Kbear!! Even if there is more to the story, it doesn't change the basic message of cutting a tree down for a view. selfish. sad. especially given that the parties have the means to move/build where the view is already present.

    Posted 3 years ago #         
  15. In all reality we have plenty of trees. They are not an endangered lot - especially in this area.

    I wonder if their house is built out of a tree? If there house is made from a tree is that considered selfish as well?

    That said, they should have built elsewhere - unless there is more to the story.

    Posted 3 years ago #         
  16. true...trees are plentiful...that's why we love it here in the great Pacific Northwest :)

    Posted 3 years ago #         
  17. Really this guy sucks BUT not as bad as: I don't know how to tiny URL sorry

    Posted 3 years ago #         
  18. For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?

    –Mark 8:36

    This Bible verse comes from a passage where Jesus is preaching to the people of Caesarea, and at this point in the story he begins making some explicit predictions about his suffering and death at the hands of men.

    Whereupon Peter (typically) takes him aside and scolds him:

    Whatchoo talkin' that stuff fuh, Master? Dontchoo wanna live, same as everyone else?.

    And Jesus rebukes him, ironically, saying,

    Who do you think you're talking to, Satan? Did you really believe I wanted to stay in this cesspit forever?

    And then he drops the irony and reminds Peter of what he (Peter) is supposed to be doing there.

    "For whoever is ashamed of Me and My words in this adulterous and sinful generation, of him the Son of Man also will be ashamed when He comes in the glory of His Father with the holy angels.”



    John Olerud is the disciple Peter in this story.

    In other words, he is a man who claims to be "with the program" yet who often needs to be reminded of just what the program is.

    Now don't misundertake me here: Olerud hasn't lost his soul. But he's gettin' there, by crackey. He's gettin' there.

    And that's just the thing about losing one's soul, see? It doesn't happen overnight, like one morning you wake up without it and you're looking all around, remembering that you had it on the day before. And you yell downstairs to your wife: Honey! Have you seen my soul?

    [It's right there in the hamper, dear!]


    Trust me on this, folks. Losing one's soul is a process that happens slowly, by imperceptible degrees. Like the proverbial frog in the soup pot.

    Sure, there's stuff that can turn up the heat a little quicker. Money, power, fame . . . All that ego-stroking swag that Olerud's got. But as it happens, the poor and obscure lose their souls at exactly the same rate as the rich and famous. So what gives? There must be more to it than just having a lot of STUFF.

    And speaking of moretoits, that's a theme that seems to be popping repeatedly here. As in . . . "John's a good guy. There's gotta be a moretoit here somewhere."

    Well, there is a moretoit, actually. And you'll be happy to know that I've figured out exactly what it is.

    Would you like me to tell you?

    Sorry . . .

    I will tell you this much, though. This thing with the tree isn't the first step John Olerud's taken off the Path which is straight and narrow.

    Probably won't be the last neither.


    Posted 3 years ago #         
  19. You try to be cynical but it's hard to keep up.  –Lily Tomlin

    Well it looks like our ole friend John "Rude Johnny" Olerud prevailed with the Clyde Hill Board of Adjustment.

    (Board of Maladjustment, more like.)

    Turns out Olerud will be allowed to FORCE his neighbor to remove two huge old trees in order to improve his own view of the Seattle skyline.

    The Clyde Hill Board of Adjustment ruled Wednesday night that Olerud's neighbor to the west must remove two trees because they unreasonably obstruct Olerud's view of Lake Washington and the Seattle skyline.

    The board's 3-2 order is the first time the city has told a resident to cut down a tree under a 1991 "view obstruction and tree removal" ordinance.


    An appraiser hired by John and Kelly Olerud said their $4 million home would be worth $255,000 more if the rare Chinese pine and the Colorado spruce across the street were cut down and replaced with smaller plants.



    Posted 3 years ago #         
  20. Smokey the Bear sez:


        Only YOU can prevent view obstruction!

    Posted 3 years ago #         
  21. The positive side to this story is now people in Seattle can have a clear view of John's house.

    Posted 3 years ago #         
  22. B-squared
    Member Profile


    What a crock!!! the tree was there when he built the house. loser.

    The only reasonable solution i think is that they move the tree.

    Posted 3 years ago #         
  23. >>The only reasonable solution i think is that they move the tree.

    –Or move John Olerud.

    His house can stay.

    Posted 3 years ago #         
  24. I Wonder
    Member Profile

    What got the bug up your knickers about John Olerud? Thats a little creepy. And since when was it cool, or allowed, to mock "retarded"? I find that to be the most offensive aspect of your rant. But it does show one's character.

    Posted 3 years ago #         
  25. John Q Public
    Member Profile

    John Q Public

    DBP rocks!

    Posted 3 years ago #         
  26. Personally, I don't care whether it was John Olerud or Mother Teresa doing this. I'd still be lambasting them.

    I wish that I was just picking on this Olerud guy. I really do. I wish that Olerud was just some kind of oddball eccentric and that me and the whole town of Clyde Hill were snickering at him behind his back.

    But apparently he's not an oddball. Not in Clyde Hill anyway. In fact there seems to be a whole village of people just like him over there, and they've enshrined their folly in an ordinance that says you can build a mansion and then make your neighbor cut down his old trees so you can have a better view. As icing on this cuckoo-cake, they've even scrounged up some justification for it in the Bible. Something about "being a good neighbor." AS IF!!

    OK, my language is offensive sometimes. Sorry. I'll try to do better. But honestly, I Wonder . . . if you find my language MORE offensive than the idea that someone could force a neighbor to kill two lovely old trees, I'd have to question your priorities.

    The two offenses are not equivalent. Not by a longshot.

    Posted 3 years ago #         
  27. B-squared
    Member Profile


    got a point, DBP. Better solution it move the Oleruds.

    Posted 3 years ago #         
  28. What gets me is that the tree magnificent as it may be only lowered the Oleruds valuation by $300,000. Which sounds big until you see the Oleruds valuation would be $4.05 million with the tree up. Vs. $4.3 million with out it. For shame John O.

    Posted 3 years ago #         
  29. Talaki34
    Member Profile


    Elevate the neighbor’s house to equal the height of the tree.

    Commission an artist to do a full-scale interpretation of the tree. After all, who doesn’t like art? :)

    Posted 3 years ago #         
  30. Talaki34, FTW!

    Posted 3 years ago #         
  31. hooper1961
    Member Profile

    the City Council presumed passage of 502 and took a jump start on smoking a joint.

    the tree existed first; thus how stupid was the decision?

    but then again I have seen cases where people buy a house by an airport and then complain about airplane noises or buy a home near an active farm and then complain about the smell.

    Posted 3 years ago #         
  32. Talaki34
    Member Profile


    Since it does not appear that the trees can be saved at their current location and the suggestion for it to be moved has been raised by B-squared…What about relocating the Chinese pine and hopefully the Spruce to the Chinese Garden here in West Seattle?

    Posted 3 years ago #         
  33. Pretty hard to relocate a 60-foot tree, but it's a nice thought.


    Posted 3 years ago #         
  34. Talaki34
    Member Profile

  35. Hey, does anyone have email addresses for these bafoons? The Times' story didn't break out who voted yay or nay but you can deduce Mrs. McLamb voted against Olerud and Mr. Bookey FOR Olerud.

    How can we start flooding their inbox's with our feelings about how they got swept up with a "celebrity" there that doesn't care about anyone else but themselves?

    Posted 3 years ago #         
  36. Wow, so the whole beauty of snyde Hill can be chopped down to allow a few select homeowners to have a better view. Real forward thinking Mr. Bookey and company, I have a feeling you know nothing about plants/trees and have nothing better to do than nitpick....maybe try a Florida retirement home instead and leave us some natural beauty we all can enjoy!

    Posted 3 years ago #         
  37. anonyme
    Member Profile

    Sorry to be so late to this discussion. Didn't realize it was addressed to me, and having no interest in Mr. Olerud hadn't clicked on it before.

    I'm with Mr. P (DBP, that is)and K-Bear: a tree IS a view. What is this fascination with water, anyway? If you want to look at the damn water, it's not that far away, is it? Does it have to be visible 24/7? Doesn't Mr. Olerud already have a great view of the water from his friggin' YACHT?

    It's also interesting that we seem to have two City ordinances in conflict with one another. It's no longer legal to cut more than 3 trees per year per property over a certain caliper, which is a pretty lax regulation, but one put in place due to the enormous loss of urban forest (70%) over the last 20 years. Then we have another ordinance that allows the massacre of huge trees to promote views? Bit of a conflict, I'd say.

    It's possible that the Chinese fir could be considered a tree of "importance" or a heritage tree. Wonder if anyone has looked into that? Does Cass Turnbull know about this idiocy?

    As for Jesus (or his daddy) condoning the cutting of the tree - isn't He supposed to have created the damn thing to begin with? Why would God want the tree cut down after going to the trouble of designing and installing it in the first place? Apparently Mr. Olerud thinks he needs a better view than God. Is that wise?

    Posted 3 years ago #         
  38. Jesus did not like some trees.

    Posted 3 years ago #         
  39. Genesee Hill
    Member Profile

    Genesee Hill

    A friend of mine ran into John at Walmart. John said he doesn't give a rip what we think. Imagine that.

    Posted 3 years ago #         
  40. What? The Most Christian Mr. Olerud doesn't give a rip about how other people feel? Yeah, I'm sure that's in the Bible somewhere, too.

            Do unto others . . . period.



    Lest we think that Clyde Hill is unique in its disdain for natural beauty, just look what this other little burb hath wrought . . .

    A three-year battle over a tall tree ended Monday, as Art and Susan Wright’s massive red cedar was being trimmed to roof height in the gray and drizzly morning.

    A neighbor in the Innis Arden community in Shoreline had complained that the almost four-story tree was blocking her view of Puget Sound and the Olympic Mountains. The neighborhood association agreed, deciding the tree’s height violated bylaws stating that nothing should obstruct any resident’s view of the surrounding area.

    I'm sure the Good Folk of Innis Arden don't give a rip what the rest of the world thinks of them either. But I'm betting they'll change their tune one day . . . when their little bubble runs out of air . . .

    Posted 2 years ago #         
  41. All I know is ... don't piss off the Maples. The Trees, Album - Hemispheres, Band - Rush.

    He probably brought about the demise of many a white ash tree. Lately baseball players have been switching to Maple. Watch out Mariners, be nice to Maples or they will get you.

    Posted 2 years ago #         
  42. The 1% gets all bent out of shape over view blocking trees in their neighbor's yards.

    The 99% gets all bent out of shape over putting dog poop in their neighbor's garbage cans.... ;-)


    Posted 2 years ago #         
  43. wakeflood
    Member Profile


    Corollary: The 1% have covenants that allow them to force neighbors to cut down trees in broad daylight, the 99% poison the tree in the middle of the night. ;-)

    Posted 2 years ago #         
  44. i am grateful i don't live on Clyde Hill

    Posted 2 years ago #         
  45. wakeflood
    Member Profile


    If you ask me, and you didn't, it's pretty obvious to outsiders who look at it, the "prosperity theology" that took over Christianity starting in the 80's is fully manifested as a cult of greed and self-righteousness.

    I have friends who have left their churches because of this. Their fellow congregants were more interested in keeping up with the Jones' and putting pious faces on their unacceptance of others than being truly good people.

    I especially don't enjoy the "Members only" pricing of goods and services and gouging of the "unwashed" by these Christian business owners. It's NOT anecdotal, it's common. And it reinforces a societal cancer of selfishness and discrimination against our neighbors. (Ahem, Mr. Olerud...)

    Having said that, I'm still hoping to find out definitively what Rolex Would Jesus Wear??

    Posted 2 years ago #         
  46. Stopped reading at "retarded."

    Grow up.

    Posted 2 years ago #         
  47. wakeflood
    Member Profile


    BTW - I think Matthew, Ch. 6 v. 13 gives us a strong hint that it's the Oyster Perpetual. Sweet!!!

    Posted 2 years ago #         
  48. Grow up?

    Ha! I would . . . but then some fat cat would probably just come and cut me down.

    And charge me for it to boot.


    Posted 2 years ago #         
  49. wakeflood
    Member Profile


    Although Paul's letter to the Ephesians has some convinced it's the Submariner Date-adjust...

    Posted 2 years ago #         
  50. Innis Arden, Washington:

    Swimmin' pools, movie stars . . .

    Posted 2 years ago #         

RSS feed for this topic

Reply »

You must log in to post.

All contents copyright 2005-2015, A Drink of Water and a Story Interactive. Here's how to contact us.
Entries and comments feeds. ^Top^