Still with me on 26-92 and HB 3104?

You wouldn’t know it by the small number of comments on my posts this week on Measure 26-92 to change governance of the Portland Development Commission (PDC), and on House Bill 3104 to change state law to allow those changes, but they’re generating quite a storm of interest (yeah, yeah, I realize and appreciate some/much of the attention was generated by Jack Bog’s blog – durn decent of Jack to stir the pot, since he’s supporting 26-92). The Oregonian‘s City Hall blog and Mercury Blogtown helped, and I’ve received several personal e-mails giving me information and opinions.

I’m very happy a measure other than 26-91 on the form of government is finally getting some public review and debate. But posting in haste due to an imminent Senate work group hearing, with inadequate/incomplete information since few people really understand what is being proposed in either 26-92 or HB 3104, has had its drawbacks. Namely, the need for running updates and corrections, as I discover additional information. With voting ending at 8 p.m. on Tuesday, I don’t know of any other way to process input and provide verified, accurate facts in a timely manner. We (readers and I) are working through this convoluted issue, right here on this blog! Exciting, right? OK, maybe not. But important, nonetheless. And such a role model for the children! See, kids, adults find stuff hard to figure out, too! And post it right out in the open for everyone to ridicule! And yet we survive, learn, move on.

So here’s where one tiny snippet of information makes a huge difference: PDC is its own “municipal corporation”, referenced in Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) 294.341, the one HB 3104 would amend.

Remember ORS 294.341? That’s the one saying:

“Governing body of certain municipal corporations to be budget committee; exception. The governing body of each municipal corporation having a population exceeding 200,000 and that is located in a county having a tax supervising and conservation commission shall be the budget committee for the municipal corporation unless the governing body of the municipal corporation elects by resolution to create a budget committee as provided in ORS 294.336.” (emphasis added)

On Tuesday, I asked:” Why is the new clause of this section even necessary, saying for cities over 400,000 (i.e., Portland), the Council IS the budget committee? Why can’t the Portland City Council just pass another resolution saying PDC is no longer the budget committee for urban renewal funds, if 26-92 is approved?”

Answer: Because “the governing body of the municipal corporation” for PDC is the Commission of five appointed volunteers overseeing the urban renewal agency, not the City Council as I had guessed. In order for the Council to become PDC’s budget committee under the existing statute, the PDC’s Board would have to pass that resolution, not the City Council.

Additional information: It was the City of Portland, on Sam Adams’ initiative, that got ORS 294.341 amended in 2005 to allow large cities to pass a resolution creating a budget committee that includes citizens as well as elected officials. Yay! The Council being the Good Guys!

This new light still doesn’t explain why the Council chose to mandate the change to make itself PDC’s budget committee in state law and via the Charter change, rather than working with PDC Commissioners to reach consensus on a mutually-acceptable change in the systems of checks and balances between the two municipal corporations. Council and PDC did good work collaborating on the current budget this year. Why is the wholesale change needed? It also doesn’t explain why citizen representatives won’t necessarily be on the Council’s budget committee for PDC, in equal numbers with the members of the Council. HB 3104 and Measure 26-92 will make Portland the only city in Oregon without mandatory inclusion of citizens helping to formulate the budget as standing committee members appointed for three or four year terms.

New question: Why do Measure 26-92 and HB 3104 not require citizen participation in formulating PDC’s budget?

A new web site, Vote No on 26-92, gives a little more information, but I still see a great need for more public comments and debate from both sides. Preferably from/by those who know and understand the issues much better than I do.

Important new piece of information, shared with permission: Commissioner Sten says he would be fine with changing the proposal for the new state law in HB 3104 to say that the City Council MAY BE the urban renewal agency’s budget committee, rather than IS. This change in ORS language would allow Portland voters to make the decision in the Charter, either by 26-92 or by later Charter change measures either reversing approval of 26-92 or seeking permission from Portland voters in another ballot measure. In my opinion, making the state law flexible and subject to the will of Portlanders is the right way to go, whether 26-92 passes or not.