Next Up at City Council, 1/17-18/2007

Next week’s Council agenda has three huge items:

1. Amend City Code regulations for sidewalk use in high pedestrian use areas – First on the regular agenda on Wednesday, but after “How are the children doing?”, Communications, and the Time Certain appointing John Mohlis, a bricklayer who serves as executive secretary-treasurer of the Columbia Pacific Building Trades Council, to the Portland Development Commission. Probably on around 10 a.m.

I received the proposed ordinance as an attachment from the Neighbors West-Northwest office, but after fifteen minutes of searching, I can’t find it posted on the City’s web site. Not under “News & Issues & Proposed Policy” linked from the front page, which is where I was kinda hoping to see it. Guess I’ll have to wait for Scott/Amy at the Mercury to post it. Anyway, it prohibits sitting or lying on city sidewalks in designated areas, between the hours of 7 a.m. and 9 p.m. Will we be allowed to perch on the edges of the fountains? How about walls, are retaining walls OK? What about art, can I sit on sturdy art forms downtown? And does this ordinance come with a plan for funding the associated improvements that will give homeless people places they are allowed to sit? I don’t see one – but that again may be because policy proposals aren’t easy to find on PortlandOnLine. I wonder if more people would be interested in them, if they were….

2. Report of the Charter Review Commission, 2 p.m. Thursday 1/18/07.

The report is finally posted, albeit in pdf format making it difficult to copy/paste here or in comments submitted to Council. Steve Duin’s column in yesterday’s Oregonian asserted Sam Adams is the swing vote on the Strong Mayor, and that changing the form of government isn’t a big priority. Try here, but his column is not yet posted on line. Probably a coincidence, nothing to do with editorial support for the Strong Mayor concept.

I haven’t heard more on whether the memorandum issued by Mayor Potter and Commissioner Sten indicates there is a deal to send everything to the ballot, or not. Note, this hearing is supposed to be about the process, rather than the substance of the Charter Review Commission’s recommendations. The Commission wants the Council to send four issues to this May’s ballot, and let the discussion take place via the campaign. I think that is a horrendous proposal. In a ballot measure, I get to vote “Yes” or “No”. I can’t vote, “Yes, if you change ‘may’ form citizen advisory committes, to ‘shall’ form citizen advisory committees” – the difference being that ‘may’ could happen, ‘shall’ has to happen. Many minor and some major changes are needed in all four proposals. Sending them “as is” to the ballot in May would increase the likelihood of four No votes by the electorate. And something as significant as changing our form of government deserves wider public participation than will happen in an off-year May election.

I believe the Commission’s recommendation is a good place to start that broader public discussion.With the possible exception of the Sten/Potter proposal to give the elected Council control over PDC’s budget, nothing should be put on the May ballot after Thursday’s hearing. Changing the Charter for the first time in nearly a century is not something that calls for a hurry-up offense. Any changes should be put to voters no sooner than 2008, after thorough community review of the Commission’s proposals.

3. Amend the Business License Fee, 3:30 p.m. Thursday Apparently they don’t think too many people will show up for Charter Reform. I’d take a sack dinner if you plan to stay for both items, just in case.

This resolution is sponsored by Mayor Potter and Commissioners Adams, Saltzman, and Sten, i.e., it is a done deal. It’s Sam’s proposal. My understanding from Willamette Week (be patient, takes forever to load) is that Commissioner Leonard hasn’t signed on because the plan is to pay for the lost revenue out of the current budget surplus, rather than identifying ongoing replacement sources. He suggests reviving discussion on a cell phone tax. It warms my heart to hear Randy hasn’t forgotten about or given up on this, despite its political unpopularity. He promised me he’d keep working on it after Dan Saltzman persuaded Council to knock 10 cents per month off sewer bills unilaterally, without identifying replacement revenue to fund the general fund bureaus such as parks which took the $3m hit.

The key point on the Business License fee is that the threshold amounts aren’t index-linked, and haven’t been raised for decades. And as Sam’s site notes, “Currently, Portland imposes a 2.2% fee – called a Business License Fee or “BLF” — on all net business profits made within the city limits; no other city in the region does this. The BLF’s fine print means 2600 businesses with gross receipts of more than $1 million pay only $100; while businesses like the corner restaurant can pay thousands.”

While it is clearly important to fix inequities like this, it is equally important to be sure future budgets will be balanced. Too often, one is done without the other.