Formerly a sign urging a "yes" vote on water fluoridation. Credit: Craig Mosbaek

Craig Mosbaek went to bed Friday night assuming nothing was amiss outside his house near SE 30th and Division, hardly a hotbed of mayhem and trouble. He woke up the next morning to something a little startling and a lot annoying.

His lawn sign endorsing Portland’s water fluoridation measure—Mosbaek is a public health consultant, former state official, and occasional volunteer for the campaign—had been torched at some point in the night. It was there when Mosbaek walked his dog around 8 pm Friday. This is what he saw in its place the next day:

Formerly a sign urging a yes vote on water fluoridation.
  • Craig Mosbaek
  • Formerly a sign urging a “yes” vote on water fluoridation.

“I woke up and went outside and saw the sign wasn’t there,” he says, “and I looked closer and you could see the ashes on the grass below the sign and a little bit of melted plastic stuck to the metal supports for the sign. I found a pack of matches close to it, too. I figured that’s what happened.”

Mosbaek says he called the cops. He’d been hearing from neighbors on both sides of the fluoride debate who’ve had signs stolen. Almost everyone has a story about that. Someone in my neighborhood found a stack of “no” signs dumped down by the Willamette River. In case you haven’t heard, fluoridation has been incredibly divisive. But this was a little bit different, a little more intimidating.

“I wasn’t worried about the house burning down,” Mosbaek says. “It was more that someone was trying to take away our free speech rights.”

Police spokesman Sergeant Pete Simpson confirms a report was taken and that Mosbaek told us what he told the cops. Simpson also says he’s heard a lot of reports “anecdotally” about sign thievery, more so than in other elections, and that “this is the first time I can remember hearing about signs being damaged.”

It’s something to keep an eye out for. Simpson says cops don’t plan on investigating, that there’s not much point given the bigger crimes the police bureau is working. He says one of strange things about sign crimes is that the signs are usually owned by the campaigns and on loan to supporters, so it’s not always clear who the victim really is.

But he also says officers will always come out and take a report. Even if it’s just sign theft.

“We want people to report theft,” Simpson says. “And if you see someone, call the police and get the police there.”

Mosbaek put up another sign. He’s not on the fence about fluoridation.

“I’m pretty supportive,” he says. “The science is clear that it’s safe and effective.”

Denis C. Theriault is the Portland Mercury's News Editor. He writes stories about City Hall and the Portland Police Bureau, focusing on issues like homelessness, police oversight, insider politics, and...

27 replies on “Someone’s “Burning” Dislike for Fluoridation: Witness a Torched Lawn Sign”

  2. Guess you didn’t write a blog post about the stack of “no” signs your neighbor found dumped near the Willamette River?

  4. Guess I didn’t. I’ve also not written blog posts about the tales of “yes” sign thievery I’ve also heard. Random sign theft on other side isn’t as interesting as fire and vandalism.

    Now… anyone on the “no” side had a sign burned, too? Send me the details (police reports and/or case numbers help) and I’ll post about it with equal indignation and clucking.

  9. I’m not going to say which side of the debate I’m on, but I will say that even though I see signs that I disagree with and make me angry, it is still that person’s right to have a sign on their property and to say what they want to say. Even if you don’t agree with it.

    Don’t vandalize other people’s signs. Just put up your own sign on your own lawn–you have a right to say what you want to say, too.

  10. Yeah, it seems like more of the pro signs are in the richer neighborhoods. Can’t help but think there’s a bit of rich privilege telling poorer folks what to do in that.

  11. Never mind decades of segregation, racism and other rampant social injustice in Portland. We’re going to fucking burn shit over ERMAHGERD PUBLIC HEALTH SCIENCE IS POISONING OUR WATER!!!1!!

  12. My friend has had No folks climbing around in her yard stealing her yes signs and replacing them with no signs. Anti-fluoride = whack-job, who does this stuff?

  13. ^^the same wacky people that do wacky things for any cause. I am no expert on anything mind you, but it seems fairly obvious even to me. Or they were roasting marshmellows, who knows?

  15. From Pakistan to Boston to Portland, isn’t fanaticism humanity’s greatest scourge?

    No justification for destroying any political sign.

    But profluoridation folks, what superior wisdom gives you the right to impose your “science,” your political beliefs, your possible knowledge deficit about potential injuries to susceptible people (infants for example) on the entire community?

    Fluoridation is medically unethical. Politically unAmerican. What wackiness has allowed fluoridation to become an article of fanatical belief and the object highly funded attempts to force everyone to submit to it?

  16. Those of you with still-remaining YES signs are randomly lucky. My daughter, in southeast Portland, has had 2 lawn signs stolen. Burning and leaving nasty signs (such as the poor home who had theirs replaced with a Get Out Of Here note–these are the ‘signs’ of seriously deranged minds.

  17. ^^^^ The same “wackiness” that already has us adding three chemicals to Portland’s “pure, mountain water” for public health reasons

  18. This is terrible. Craig helped start the Portland Farmer’s Market. He helped get soda out of schools. He has done more for tobacco prevention than just about anybody in this state. He’s an example of the many amazing community health advocates out there helping to support fluoridation, and this is the kind of threat he gets? This is ridiculous.

  20. Distraction from the real issue here.
    If we can simply look at what happened here in Portland, it clears up everything.

    1. A lobby group uses the 2007 OR “Smile Survey” data to declare a “dental crisis” and lobbies City Council ($9000) to fluoridate PDX. City Council obeys 5-0.

    2. The 2012 OR Smile Survey comes out proving that not only do we *not* have a dental crisis but our teeth are better than the fluoridated areas in Oregon!
    IOW, fluoridation of the water had no positive effect on
    preventing cavities.

    Note: it took two Freedom of Information Act requests to get the data released before the vote. Someone did not want us to see it!

    Before you vote please watch:
    http://www.katu.com/news/problemsolver/Bef…

  21. What a coincidence! The man who’s sign was burned was a Board Member and Chair of
    Upstream Public Health the pro-fluoridation lobby group behind the “yes” vote.

    What are the odds of that Mel Rader? Mark Weiner? Anyone? Denis?
    Fishy!

  22. The man whose sign was burnt was actually “Board Member and Chair Upstream Public Health 2003 – 2009. Upstream is the pro-fluoride lobby group. What a coincidence!

    This certainly looks like the pro-fluoridationist getting desperate (and juvenile) and trying to frame those who are against fluoridation.

    Further, he even testified for fluoridation at City Council recently! He did not disclose his relationship with Upstream.http://youtu.be/UiR2HNNJ3cE

    Was the writer aware of this relationship and decided that this was not worth disclosing?

  23. These are individuals, neither campaign has any control over what they do. And I know for a fact that, more than once, a pro-fluoride groupie “stole” yes signs from his own campaign in order to create a story and distract people from the real issues (because people are figuring it out). Leave the signs alone folks, that is super childish (plus I think the “yes” signs are comical and actually hurt their cause). Remember, fluoridation allows government to do something even your doctor can’t do: force you to take a medication without consent, without evaluation of individual need, weight, lifestyle or existing medical conditions. I voted no on ethical grounds. And if you’re balking at the word ‘medication’ please know that this use of fluoride meets exactly the definition: a substance where the target is the human body for a purported health effect.” How can we say yes to government putting medicine for all in the water? It should be a choice, not a mandate. And let’s not forget that 97% of this stuff never hits its target, people’s bodies, and goes straight down the drain.

Comments are closed.