June 02, 2004
(Updated) Francesconi Campaign Staff Shake-Up?
'WW' Says Campaign Manager And Spokesman Are Out
Note: This post has been updated. Any and all updates appear at the end of the original post.
Well, campaign watchers certainly all came away from the May 18 primary election results assuming that Jim Francesconi would shake up his campaign staff before launching into the general election campaign.
A week or two ago, someone mentioned to us the rumor that in fact Francesconi had already done so -- in this person's version it was reportedly a total change-over.
Today comes this week's "Murmurs" column in Willamette Week, which includes this item (already gotten to today by pdx_reporter):
It happens all in the time in pro sports: A lousy team keeps its players and fires its coach. Murmurs hears that Team Francesconi is following that model. When the million-dollar mayoral candidate returns from a post-primary European jaunt next week, he will name replacements for campaign manager Phil Donovan and communications director Ed Grosswiler, who take the fall for his having no achievements and no plan. Pollster Lisa Grove will reportedly remain on the payroll.
That's something less than a total change of staff, but not at all insignificant. However, we do find it somehow strange that Grove will remain on board, given the controversy over the Francesconi camp's use of push polls against Tom Potter during the primary campaign.
And it also does little to assuage our own concerns that a candidate's campaign tends to reflect his own priorities and his own leanings. It was, after all, Francesconi who brought Donovan and Grosswiler in to begin with, so the responsibility for whatever it is they did or did not do still rests with the candidate himself.
Update
Not sure how we missed this before, but this story certainly gives new meaning to Francesconi's theme and/or slogan (which is still getting play on his campaign website): "It is time for a new kind of leadership."
Comments (16)
Scott Jensen on 02 Jun 2004
Isn't it amazing what a million Bucks can't buy you in PDX. I'm placing my bet on the $60k guy.
Mike D on 03 Jun 2004
Why do Portlanders have this knee-jerk reaction about Francesconi's ability to raise campaign funds? Are these are the same people out protesting the latest Starbucks? It's seems very childish.
Francesconi was the only member of the city council to NOT support Dignity Village and for that, he'll get my vote. That vote went 4-1 against him and yet he stayed true to his convictions that DV is not the answer for homelessness...but only a feelgood measure that this town seems to wallow in.
A political hack would have knuckled under the political winds and voted along with the majority.
Spine on 03 Jun 2004
It's not the money that Portlanders objected to, Mike D, but rather what Francesconi did with it. Rather than reach out to voters, he tried to manipulate them with media saturation and, possibly, push-polling. A lot of PDXers seem to feel that this kind of cynical politics isn't a good fit for our city, and I'm inclined to agree with them.
Mike D on 03 Jun 2004
"...this kind of cynical politics isn't a good fit for our city..."
Spine: This city is run by nothing but cynical politicians---most hand-picked by Neil G!
Pete on 03 Jun 2004
Francesconi's fund raising was an issue before he spent a dime on media or polls, but that doesn't make Mike D right either. Jim has a history of being cozy with developers and business muckety mucks whose values lean more towards their pocket books than the good of the city. Remember Jim's refusal of the anti-war resolution annd how his statement mirrored the memo from the PBA? It's actions like that paired with record breaking fund-raising that make it look like Jim favors the check writers over the people who cannot afford multi-thousand dollar donations.
Additionally, the Francesconi team's fund raising had some illegal looking actions associated with it. Plus the accusations Spine mentioned. The money just didn't look good on him. If he had raised it all legally and transparently, then it would've been less of an issue.
As for Dignity Village and Jim standing strong on his view, well, he picked a side and Portlanders will judge him on that. He shouldn't expect extra credit points for not waffling or flip flopping.
Tim on 03 Jun 2004
One more thing to add, if you look at Francesconi's campaign financing disclosures, you will find where his money comes from. Francesconi’s money comes in large donations, i.e. thousands of dollars, primarily from developers, real estate and businesses interests. With $1 million from developers and real estate investors and buisness interests, is it really a “knee jerk” reaction to question whether Francesconi would have the best long term interests of the city in mind as mayor?
Also while Fransesconi did not support Dignity Village, I haven’t heard him offering up any solutions that could be implemented immediately. While diginity village may not be perfect, it seems to be helping some homeless people, and is better that just saying, “no” without offering any workable solutions. Plus Franseconi’s I will never be homeless because I am rich comment didn’t help him on the political front, even though I don’t think his comments were intended to be insensitive, they just came out that way.
Mike D on 03 Jun 2004
I agree that the Mayor and city council have had a cozy relationship with developers to the detriment of the taxpayers of Portland (e.g. tax abatements for $400,000 condos, streetcars, lightrail, tram).
And Francesconi's donation list is somewhat troublesome BUT someone (me) has to point out that Potter's "no donation over $100" is just a marketing gimmick--which obviously plays well in Portland. And besides Vera supports Potter (though she won't say so) and that's enough for me.
And as for Dignity Village solution---it's spelled G-E-T-A-J-O-B.
Noah Brimhall on 03 Jun 2004
Mike D said: "Potter's 'no donation over $100' is just a marketing gimmick"
Potter's donation limit may be politics (this is a political race afterall), but it is also a practical limit on the amount of influence his contributors can buy. An average Joe's $100 donation helps Potter out just as much as a major developer's donation helps out. Sure, knowing that a major developer supports your campaign may give you more of a mental boost. Huge, multi-thousand dollar donations are out of the reach of the average person, but $100 is not.
From his comments about the homeless, Mike D. obviously has no real understanding of the root causes of homelessness. Dignity Village is a way off the streets and on the way to stability for some homeless people. It is not perfect, but it is better (dare I say more humane) than living in the stoop of a downtown/old town building. Jim Francesconi has every right to vote against Diginity Village, but as Pete said, "Portlanders will judge him on that."
Tim on 04 Jun 2004
>And as for Dignity Village solution---it's spelled G-E-T-A-J-O-B.
While this should be fairly obvious, this isn't a solution. Someone sleeping on the streets with no telephone for contact or stability can hardly be expected to just "get a job." Who is going to hire someone living in the streets? And that doesn't even begin to address the whole skill set issue that is person specific. Get a job is a statement, not a solution to the issue of homelessness in Portland.
Spine on 04 Jun 2004
Solution? Statement? I'm going with callous cliche.
Max on 04 Jun 2004
"G-E-T-A-J-O-B" is more that just an ignorant statement. The bootstrap ideology espoused by Mike D echoes the neoconservative matra that those who are on the fringes of "mainstream" society are there because they either deserve or want to be there.
Homelessness in Portland is a problem mainly because of our virtually non-existant mental health care system, our poor economy and lack of support for people to get off the streets.
Dignity Village is not a panacea. It is, however, a proactive way to help the homeless problem. It is the role of government to protect the rights of its citizens. Many, myself included, believe that adequate housing--a roof and 4 walls--is a right.
Francesconi is entitled to oppose Dignity Village. I would just hope that he might have a differing creative solution to the issue of homelessness.
Max on 04 Jun 2004
"G-E-T-A-J-O-B" is more that just an ignorant statement. The bootstrap ideology espoused by Mike D echoes the neoconservative matra that those who are on the fringes of "mainstream" society are there because they either deserve or want to be there.
Homelessness in Portland is a problem mainly because of our virtually non-existant mental health care system, our poor economy and lack of support for people to get off the streets.
Dignity Village is not a panacea. It is, however, a proactive way to help the homeless problem. It is the role of government to protect the rights of its citizens. Many, myself included, believe that adequate housing--a roof and 4 walls--is a right.
Francesconi is entitled to oppose Dignity Village. I would just hope that he might have a differing creative solution to the issue of homelessness.
Pete on 04 Jun 2004
At a City Council hearing on granting Dignity Village a (semi?)permanent spot on city land, a man testified that Dignity Village saved his life. He said that he was a recovering alcoholic and that he would be dead today if it were not for the embrace of the Dignity Village communtiy and the opportunity they've offered him to move forward from his distitute state. That's a lot more than "get a job."
Dignity Village is obviouly not the answer for every homeless person, nor do they accept just anybody, but it is a very important institution to Portland's poverty class. DV shows that we as a city do care about and recognize the homeless as humanity, and that they are able to help themselves.
Francesconi doesn't support this. Portlanders will judge him on that.
Gary Marschke on 05 Jun 2004
I have to point out that regardless of the money questions of where, who and how much, the issue that takes Potter over the top in my opinion is Community Policing. If there ever was a single issue worthy of consideration above all others, that's it. Everything else pretty much either pales by comparison or hinges on it. JF needs to wake up more than he needs to shake up.
Pete on 06 Jun 2004
I respectfully disagree with Gary. Policing is just one of many important issues that we'll need our next Mayor to take seriously and have a good plan for. Potter's huffing and puffing about Community Policing is tired and is no panacea to our policing problems. That aside, and going back to the point of the thread, I see Francesconi's mega-fund raising and the appearance of iffy ethics of that fund raising as out of character with this city. The problems that we'll be asking our next mayor to work on have lots of solutions, we need a mayor who will solve problems in a way that maintains the character of this great town. Potter seems a better choice for me in that department, but I'd like to get a better feel for what his solutions will be, rather than just believing in his self proclaimed leadership/change agent line.
Tafari on 06 Aug 2004
Get a flippin' Job? Bloodclaat! Mikey D knows better.
Mike D knows I've worked at the Saturday Market for five years, as do about a dozen Villagers and former ones.
Kay works at the deli counter at Fred Myers most days and says the $8 an hour she makes just don't cut it rent-wise these days.
Lots of us work, some older women like Patricia worked all their lives until their health went. Some were told when they applied for emergency shelter for the first time ever to get on a waiting list and until your name comes up, get under a tree.
Underemployment is really the problem for a lot of people nowadays.