Charter reform and The Dead Parrot sketch

Possibly the single most famous Monty Python sketch of all time was The Dead Parrot. Whether you know it by heart, need a refresher, or have never seen it, please click that link now, and read it to yourself in your best British accent – or watch it on YouTube. John Cleese was the customer, Michael Palin the pet shop owner.

I felt like I was beating a dead parrot on the testimony table in the Portland City Council’s six hour hearing on Charter Reform today. Except that the Council never got to the line, “Well, I’d better replace it then.” It didn’t matter what anyone said. It didn’t matter that when asked to provide a version of the new Civil Service Chapter with underlining showing new language, and strike-through showing deleted, a copy was submitted with all the new chapter underlined, followed by the entire old chapter in strike-through. The owner of the store, Mayor Potter, and his two trusty cohorts, Dan Saltzman and Sam Adams, passed multiple 3-2 votes sending three measures on Charter Reform to citizens in three months. The only change they made in the Charter Reform Commission’s recommendation was to add a requirement for a public hearing process before the next Charter Review Commission would have the authority to rush future changes onto the next ballot without City Council approval. This was my request, picked up by Erik Sten. Woo hoo! That was time well spent, to get that!

That was not, of course, the reason I sat there waiting for four turns to give three minutes of testimony on each referral. I was the only person who stayed to testify on the last item, the new language for making the City Council the budget committee for the Portland Development Commission. That was the only one to receive a 5-0 vote – and the only one that completely ignored the Charter Reform Commission’s recommendation. Everyone was polite and didn’t mention that fact, having spent the previous 5 hours, 50 minutes with three members of the Council arguing all the other proposals had to be sent immediately and verbatim, out of respect for those 20 volunteers.

I stayed for six hours and testified in the hope that it wasn’t a done deal. I think I realized how done the deal was, when Commissioner Adams was called upon to express his opinion on something. Sam was present by phone since he had emergency surgery yesterday. Instead of answering the question, he said, “Er, Mayor, what do you think about that?” – clearly, subject to marching orders to toe the line. It was at that point that I gave up hope. And then, I stayed to testify to the camera, with the goal of persuading Portland voters watching on cable not to approve the referred measures on form of government, Civil Service rules, and the ongoing process for more Charter amendment.

There were a couple of bright spots in the six hours. Early on, Mayor Vera Katz testified that Columbia Sportswear leaving Portland was an example of where having a Mayor in charge of everything would have changed the outcome. “So you don’t think that strict interpretation of the code by staff employed to implement it would happen under a Strong Mayor/CAO?”, asked Randy Leonard. It took strong willpower not to stand up and cheer, for two reasons. One, that was indeed precisely what Columbia Sportswear objected to. The company wanted the City to promise they would certainly be given zone changes and code amendments, when land use laws require that such requests are discretionary decisions on which citizens are required to be allowed to comment. Staff did exactly the right thing, in refusing to promise what was not in their power to give. And two, there was a time (if you’ll forgive me saying so, Randy) when Commissioner Leonard himself had less of a grasp of this core concept than he evidently has now. He, like all other commissioners-in-charge of planning/development services before him, has learned, through the process of seeing how the approval and permitting system is supposed to work. It’s one of the great advantages of the current system, and flaws in the proposed one, that everyone learns better when given actual situations in which to figure out practical solutions. Abstract policy becomes real when applied to real life.

I was THIS close to wanting to stand up and cheer again, when Commissioner Saltzman had a rare moment of insight and proposed sending the Civil Service chapter changes to the ballot in November, to allow more time for refinement and to see what happens with the Mayor/CAO (Chief Administrative Officer) proposal. Sadly, as Rob Wheaton, the union representative for affected parks workers, and Yvonne Deckert, the current Human Resources Director, kept talking, the moment passed and Commissioner Saltzman decided to revert to his previous safe haven of “let the people decide”. In his voting summary, he said “sending these measures to the ballot is a precursor of setting up geographic representation and districts with a greater number of people on the Council”. Good to know what else is coming down the pike, if these changes pass. Apparently we’re headed to the future envisioned in the failed Ball initiative, but broken into chunks so each piece might have a chance of passing.

I’ll post some of my testimony later, as it summarizes my thinking on all these issues right now, and also tells you my decision for the ethical choice. Right now, I have to note my gratitude to both Commissioner Leonard and Commissioner Sten. For me personally, it is very difficult to watch the five men on the Council deliberate and vote, without thinking about what might have been had I won the election last year. Today, instead of losing all the votes 2-3, the two Commissioners agreeing with me would have won them 3-2. But the sadness I feel when confronting those thoughts was mitigated by Randy Leonard and Erik Sten being so inspirational, so intelligent, so right in their questions, comments, amendments, and votes today. They listened, they picked up on points in my testimony and that of others, which had not been highlighted ahead of time. As Randy said at the end, I don’t know whether I’m more disturbed by the proposals or by the fact that three members of the Council voted for them. But at least two didn’t. Thank you, Randy and Erik.