Actual content, for a change

I’m enjoying my parents’ visit. They’ll be back in England next week, and I plan to continue to spend as much time as possible with them while they’re here. We’ve been delighting in simple pleasures like shopping, walking around the Rose Test Garden, visiting the Chinese Garden and an Old Town art gallery, and driving around town tracking down correctly-completed forms accompanied by $5 bills or checks in neighborhoods all over Portland. Good times.

But I miss writing about issues I find interesting and want more Portlanders to know about, and wow, what a bumper crop of interesting articles in today’s newspapers! The Mercury carries one on day shelters for homeless people by Matt Davis, a final Hall Monitor by Scott Moore (leaving to become Bill Bradbury’s Communications Director) supporting a proposal to spend $500 million on a City-sponsored fiber optic network (Scott, if Ashland couldn’t make it work, what makes you think Portland would?), and more on the horrible process to rename Interstate Avenue from Amy J. Ruiz. Amy quotes Multnomah County Commissioner Serena Cruz:

“In Portland, ‘we need more process’ is code for ‘we’re still uncomfortable,'” Cruz said. The rename, she said, has been through two neighborhood meetings, two public hearings, and two city council meetings. “Now, after all of that discussion, it’s time for our city council to make a tough decision. It’s time for our next mayor to make a tough decision,” she said, referring to City Commissioner Sam Adams.”

That’s not my view of what public process does and is supposed to do, in Portland. My credo is based on the words of the late Judy Wyers, former Metro Presiding Officer, who said, “There’s no point in holding a public hearing if it doesn’t matter what citizens say when they show up.” The Portland City Council set up a process where apparently it doesn’t matter (and was never intended to matter) what citizens said when they went to those “two neighborhood meetings, two public hearings, and two city council meetings”. And Commissioner Cruz doesn’t seem to understand why people are “still uncomfortable”. From what I’ve heard and read, calling the participants on both sides of the Interstate naming debate “uncomfortable” is almost as inaccurate as referencing childbirth pain as “pressure”. Do the Councilmen who plan to vote to rename Interstate really believe that will put an end to all the angst they fostered by messing up this process so badly? And why did they apparently learn absolutely nothing from previous street renaming debacles?

The Oregonian pulls together a bunch of interesting information in today’s edition, too. Dylan Rivera reports on a proposed carbon tax proposal unveiled by Commissioner Dan Saltzman in Chicago. Yes, the tax would be here, the announcement was in Illinois. It would fine developers who don’t provide better-than-required energy efficiency in new home construction techniques. If we want higher environmental standards for new development, and have had the public debate showing that higher new home costs are worth the investment in future savings for homedwellers as well as for sustainability, why not simply put the requirements in the Code? Oh, I see, the article says, “Saltzman acknowledged that home builders may react strongly against it. To ease the industry into the fold, he said the plan would include a two-year period of city-funded technical support and education for builders.” Instead of setting clear, improved standards and setting the expectation that all construction in Portland will comply with them, the City would spend money on setting up the tax and training/persuading developers on ways to avoid it. In addition to considering, “Is this the right thing to do?”, the Council should discuss, “Is this the most cost-effective and efficient way to do it?”

Other Oregonian articles that caught my attention today:

Apartments rising in South Waterfront by Ryan Frank, including the hilarious assertion, “In South Waterfront, apartment builders see a captive market driven by their neighbor and Portland’s largest employer, OHSU. Even with high rents, they expect students, interns, nurses and visiting professors will help fill the roughly 1,800 apartments in the plans.” The “high rent” mentioned is $3,000 per month. Of the team on my regular shift working weekends at OHSU, only two of my five coworkers live in Portland. The other three RNs live in Milwaukie, Beaverton, and unincorporated Washington County. Only the two Mental Health Technicians (nurses’ assistants) live in Portland. One lives in an apartment on Barbur Boulevard – while he’s miffed that the South Waterfront high-rises have obliterated his view, he wouldn’t be able to afford rents there. Neither would my other coworker, who lives on Burnside and is sometimes late on Sundays after forgetting that the tram doesn’t operate that day. South Waterfront for regular health care workers? Not.

And see County halts $44 million deal by Arthur Gregg Sulzberger. The Multnomah County Commissioners appear to be having second thoughts about buying a downtown building after reading a memo sent by Auditor LaVonne Griffin-Valade. “…commissioners said, they’re worried about the high price tag, given that part of the building dates to 1895 and would need at least $20 million in renovations to meet safety standards and county needs. Although the building is now appraised at $44.5 million to $46.8 million, Unico bought it from Qwest Corp. two years ago for less than $12 million.” Good work, LaVonne! This is the second time this week that I’ve felt highly rewarded for having supported the successful candidate in a recent election campaign. I watched part of the Portland Public School Board’s debate on the school transfer policy on Monday evening, and felt extremely satisfied to see and hear Ruth Adkins providing the voice and viewpoint I knew she would.