September 23, 2004

'I'm More Confused Than When I Went In'

Report From The League Of Women Voters Candidates Forum

That headline is quote from someone we talked to outside after last night's League of Women Voters candidates forum at St. David of Wales Episcopal Church, who had been away from Portland for some time and was just starting to become acquainted for the imminent Mayoral and City Council elections.

Past candidate forums at churches have tended to suffer from an over-abundance of hot air -- by which we mean not from the candidates but from a lack of air conditioning and circulation. Last night's forum managed to escape that particular fate, but suffered from a lack of a sound system, requiring the audience ocassionaly to strain to hear what the candidates were saying (some more than others, but we'll refrain from naming names in order to avoid any accusation that we're singling out our least-favorite candidate).

At any rate, for around ninety minutes last night, candidates answered a series of questions posed by the League, and eventually a small set of questions from one another.

The first round of questions were specific to the office each candidate is seeking, beginning with the matter of what would be each candidate's first action once in office.

Mayoral candidate Tom Potter outlined his intention to take all City bureaus into his own portfolio (although he did not specify that it only would be for the duration of the initial budget process), in order to make the "substantive changes" of a service-oriented approach, breaking down the "silos" that separate bureau functionality, increasing diversity, and operating from a "managing for results" standpoint.

Potter's opponent Jim Francesconi (who responded to a League admonition that the audience not take pictures while candidates are speaking by saying pictures of him were okay, "but not from the side") said his first action would be to meet with all other members of the City Council, bureau managers, and City workers, and start the process of holding "neighborhood office hours." Francesconi also said his focus would be on good-paying jobs with health care, the quality of schools, and ensuring that Portland did not have "first and second-class neighborhoods."

(For what it's worth, Francesconi may have mentioned the neighborhood office hours idea before, but if so we've not encountered it before. In the same vein, Potter has said he would spend half of his time at Mayor out in the various communities of Portland.)

Next, the League asked the Mayoral candidates to describe their long-term vision for the City.

Francesconi described a "great City with opportuntiy for all" -- something he said was a mere campaign slogan in other cities, but that Portland's history demonstrates is something more here. He reiterated his call for a focus on basic services, adding the relatively-recent modifier "in all neighborhoods." He added the need to do better at creating jobs, and offered a focus on the quality of both jobs and schools.

Potter described a City in which "every person has a roof over their head," access to good medical care, and a part to play in making government function more effectively. He said that every child deserves to have the "opportuntiy to succeed" and that it "requires a community" to make all these things happen.

Having asked two questions of the Mayoral candidates, the League turned now to a pair of questions for the candidates in the other open race, beginning with a request to describe the first two initiatives they would pursue once in office.

City Council candidate Nick Fish said his initial focus would be on "open and transparent government," calling that the "fundamental cornerstone" or restoring people's trust in the City. He called for City Council meetings to be held in Portland's neighborhoods, during evening hours to allow more working people to attend and participate, the publication of the Council agenda in a paper more accessible to the general population than The Daily Journal of Commerce (two people in the audience raised their hands when Fish asked if anyone subscribes to that paper), and said that his office would send follow-up communications to all people who testified before Council, including updates on the issue upon which they spoke.

Fish's opponent Sam Adams listed his intention to file an ordinance requiring paid lobbyists in the City of Portland to register and disclose the clients for which they are working, in order to help "separate influence from citizen involvement." He also repeated his call for the City's $1.8 billion budget to be broken down by neighborhood, and for bureau heads to be required to take the proposed budgets out into the neighborhoods themselves for citizen input.

Next, the League asked the City Council candidates to explain what they would have done differently than the current Council had they already been in office during the past year.

Adams rattled off a quick salvo of issues -- from opposing reservoir burial, to opposing a water treatment facility, to opposing Major League Baseball, to opposing the covering of I-405 with public money. He also called for a study of the I-5/I-405 loop, which he said has never been studied, despite it being "the most important stretch of freeway in Oregon" and the need to increase freight mobility.

Fish adopted Adams' list, and then said that in the wake of the recent police arbitration award which required the City to rework its budget he would not have supported taking a reduction in the owner's deduction from the business income tax off the table, because it's important that the City "send a signal" the the business community that it is serious about making changes. He also cited the cost of the Iraq war and how it has been used to reduce funding in other critical areas as a basis for considering the City resolution on the war to be a local issue.

Next came a series of questions asked of all four candidates running for the Mayoral and City Council positions, which opened by asking for ideas to address a fear of the police on the part of Portland's minority communities.

Francesconi cited taking the "unusual step" of presenting a resolution caling for diversifying the police force, a report on racial profiling, and reform in training procedures. He also called for "holding officers accountable in rare cases" which it is necessary to do so.

Potter referred to the beginnings of community policing in Portland, during a time when many similar issues were at hand, getting "officers out of their cars" and building trust in the community. He claimed a 50% increase in the diversity of the force when he was Chief of Police. He also stated that he would keep Derrick Foxworth in position at the head of the Police Bureau.

Fish referred to having a "comprehensive plan on public safety," and echoed the calls for increased diversity and training reform. On the latter, he called for ensuring that "community standards" are part of police training. In the cause of transparency and trust, he also said he would push for a change to state law, so that after a grand jury concludes it work, the testimony would be made public.

Adams said he agreed with all that had been said by the others, but said that the "elephant in the room is [that] we're short on resources." He called for the City to work with Multnomah County on law enforcement and jails in order to decrease or eliminate unnecessary overlap and fund these needs in an "integrated way."

Next, the League referred to the disagreement over whether businesses in Portland are paying too much in taxes and fees, or paying too little, and asked the candidates to describe what changes, if any, they would make.

Potter said there are two reasons businesses feel they are paying too much -- the first being that they are. The second problem, he said, was that the "City doesn't spend its money wisely." He repeated his call for a planning process to generate a "strategic vision and plan" that is based upon "community priorities," and said that he would sit with both businesses and citizens to "make sure, as a community, that we agree."

Francesconi said that one a statewide basis, businesses do not pay too much. But they do when it comes to operating in Multnomah County. He also drew a distinction between big business, which he said does not pay too much, and small business, which he said does pay too much and should be able to take higher deductions. Turning to response to Fish's earlier comment that taking off the table a reduction in the owner's deduction from the business income tax was a mistake, Francesconi said that it had come down to having to choose between that reduction (for which Francesconi has been pushing) or money for affordable housing. But in his first 100 days, he said, he would move to make the reduction in the owner's deduction. He also said that the biggest tax issue regards residents, bot businesses, but that for now, the Multnomah County income tax needs to be maintained.

Fish repeated his support for the aforemention reduction when it came to the business income tax, and called for "immediate relief for small businesses." He said that the City is "losing jobs across the board" and that the money generated by the business income tax has dropped from $58 million to $35 million. Fish then pledged that until "we know if urban renewal districts are delivering" and the City has a strategic plan, he would not support any increases in taxes.

Concurring with the previous answers, Adams added another issue to the mix: The need to look at water and sewer fees, which combined are the highest in the United States. He called for the creation of a City utility commission, to "remove politics" from operating City utilities, turning them over instead to "expertise and independence."

As if on cue, the League next asked the candidates to explain the City's increasing water and sewer rates. Appropriately enough, it was Adams' turn to answer first.

"Part of it," Adams explained, "is the Federal mandate to prevent sewage spills into the river." While cleaning the river is something he and most people support, he expressed some concerns over "how we go about that." Of the $1.8 billion City budget, he said, $1.4 billion is the cost of operating water and sewer services. In this sense, he said, the municipal corporation is a utility. With members of City Council each responsible for their own handful of various bureaus, "they need help" when it comes to the large responsibility of running water and sewer services. For example, he said, his previously-mentioned utility commission, as well as a move to zero-based budgeting to help restore "trust, credibility, and efficiency."

(For what it's worth, w'ere still researching that breakdown of the budget. So far, we've only found an indication that "public utilities" consume a little under $620 million of the nearly $1.8 billion budget, and not $1.4 billion. Whether this means Adams is wrong, or that we're simply having difficulty deciphering budget documents, we are unsure.)

Fish expressed his confusion over why a water system than benefits from "the two greatest natural advantages" -- those being natural purity and a gravity-fed system -- costs as much as it does. Agreeing that part of the current costs is the Big Pipe (otherwise known as the Combined Sewer Overflow) project, he asked why the City is paying for this project without help from its "state and Federal partners." When it comes to the longer term, he reiterated his oppositon to reservoir burial and to filtration at Powell Butte. He then offered one idea to make money: Take the reservoir covers recently embroiled in the eBay fiasco and turn them into a "slip and slide" for Marquam Hill instead of building an aerial tram to OHSU.

Potter (after saying that he liked the "slip and slide" idea) concurred with Fish's comments and added a concern over deferred maintenance on the City's infrastructure, and the fact that despite having "a lot of old equipment" in our water and sewer systems, the City never ensured that it maintained financial reserves to fund necessary work.

Francesconi added another explanation for water and sewer rates: "We took money out of water to pay for the computer billing system." He used that as an opportunity to say that the idea of the City condemning PGE is not something the City should be doing. Joining the support for the goal of cleaning up the river, he said that there needed to be outside audits, and functions of the Water Bureau and the Bureau of Environmental Services should be combined.

Next, the League picked up on recent changes to City Code, and asked the candidates about bringing before the Council issues not related to the bureaus in their own respective portfolios.

Fish began by providing a brief explanation of the recent changes, and said that his concern with the new rule was not necessarily that it existed but that "it should not be abused." He also said that "collegiality" often was missing on the City Council, and that abuse of the new rules could lead to more "grandstanding" and "freelancing" on the part of commissioners.

Adams said he "wouldn't want to engage in grandstanding," but believed that the new rule represented a good change. He said that when he was working for the City, he didn't realize there was a restriction on commissioners introducing proposals for bureaus not their own, and that "over the years, we violated that." Referencing the incident which prompted the rule change in the first place, Adams said he was supportive of Francesconi's "efforts to bring forth his questions regarding the Police Bureau." He also argued that ensuring that the City has a clear strategic plan might help generate agreement amongst City Council members that would preempt any needs to use the new rule.

Fish jumped in before the Mayoral candidates took their turn to response to the question at hand, in order to take back his use of the word "grandstanding" to describe use of the new rule. (Francesconi, whose actions prompted the new rule, was due to speak next.)

Francesconi said that the City does need a strategic plan. He added that use of the new rules "should be done rarely" but that it could be needed in "some circumstances."

Potter said it was "important [that] the whole Council participate in decisions," and that he would "lead discussion" so that no one is ever surprised by what comes before Council.

Next, the League asked what the candidates would do to ensure that police officers are trained in how to interact with people having mental illnesses.

Potter said the currently the Police Bureau has crisis response teams, where certain officers are trained in this way, but that not all members of the Police Bureau receive such training and that sometimes there is no crisis response team near enough to a scene to respond in time. As such, Potter said he supports having all officers receive such training.

Francesconi said that the Bureau needs more officers, and he would add thirty more in his first 100 days in office. He also said that officers need "some place to take them other than jail," and urged cooperation amongst the City, County, and state to create a short-term treatment facility.

Fish repeated a line he's used before, explaining that in Oregon police officers receive fewer weeks of training than hair dressers. As such, he again repeated (as had all the candidates) the call for increased training, saying officers needed "the tools to be successful."

Adams (adopting the previous comments, as he and other candidates had done during the course of the forum) added his support for requiring officers to be trained in the actual neighborhoods in which they will be serving, and learning something about the people that live there. He repeated something he'd recently heard from a Portland resident: "The officers know the drug dealers by name, but they don't know me."

Next, the League references an $11 million for affordable housing, and asked the candidates to explain how funds for affordable housing should be prioritized.

Francesconi said the priority must be on "the very poor," which he described as "where the crisis is." He called for "shelter housing aimed at special needs," and referred to a pilot project with JOIN to get people into the many currently-vacant apartments in Portland. He also cited the need to help with minority home-ownership, saying that it's "the best way to accumulate wealth."

Potter said that 10% of the City's homeless people use 50% of the available services, and that getting people inti housing would "begin to free up money to address other groups." He added that "40% of homeless are families," and urged people to understand that "affordable housing affects everybody."

Adams said it was important to leverage cooperation with the private sector to create "mixed-income developments" rather than creating entire areas of the City devoted solely to low-income residents. "Public housing works best," he said, "when it's mixed housing."

Fish referred to his time as a member of the Housing Authority of Portland board, and said that the New Columbia development is a model of the kind of mixed-income housing just discussed. He echoed the call for the "poorest of the poor" to be the priority, called the minority home-ownership gap "disgraceful," and expressed support for the 10-year plan to end homelessness in Portland.

Next, candidates were asked by the League to discuss their views on issues related to the City's park land.

Fish said the City had to "begin by talking about equity." He called I-205 a "divide in our community," and talked about the disparity in park land between areas west and east of I-205. In addition, he said that the "vast majority" of parks and parks facilities east of I-205 are "unimproved." He went on to suggest that the reason so many people east of I-205 routinely vote down levies and taxes is "because they rarely see a return."

Adams called Fish's response a "good overview" and said that one way to push towards such equity is to "make the budget more understandable" so that everyone, in every neighborhood, has an opportunity to see how the City's money is being spent. He said that the City's strategic plan "needs to come down to a grassroots level," and that every neighborhood should have an expectation of a minimum level of services.

Potter said that the "number of open spaces" being sold by Portland Public Schools should be acquired by the City of Portland, that "citizens have a choice in determining where parks go," and that there needs to be "sufficient money to maintain the parks."

Francesconi said that he was proud of the purchase of park lands during his tenure in charge of Portland Parks & Recreation, and said that part of what makes it possible is "raising the system development charges on developers." He also cited the passage and use of the parks levy.

Moving along, the League next asked the candidates for their views on the future of Dignity Village.

Adams pointed out that "here you do have a choice" between the views of himself and his opponent. He expressed his support for Dignity Village, but conditioned continuing such support on it serving as an "intake" into further social services and progress. If the Village simply manages to consist of the same people permanently housed there, that would affect his support. In the context of availabel shelter space, he cited the shortage of beds both for individuals and families, and pointed out that there is "not a lot of money coming soon." He added: "If we close down Dignity Village tomorrow, we'll have 60 more homeless people."

Fish said that he already had misgivings about Dignity Village, but that "when my oppoent says let's put families next to the town dump, that gets my blood boiling." He asked why people were accepting something like Dignity Village as "the way people should live," and says he has objected to the Village because he believes Portland can do better.

Francesconi said that when he voted against Dignity Village he hoped he would turn out to be wrong. But, he said, he wasn't and isn't wrong. "I don't think we should put families in Dignity Village," he said. It is more important, he argued, to "work with people to transition into affordable housing."

Potter reiterated his support, saying: "There are no homeless people in Dignity Village." He drew a contrast to the existence of real homeless people who simply try to camp out under the City's bridges. He added that it was important to "make sure these programs do transition people." He partially explained his support for Dignity Village by saying it was an example of "homeless people taking control of their own lives."

For the final round of questions, the League stepped aside and candidates were given the opportuntiy to ask questions of each other.

Citing the emphasis on affordable housing (and touting some of his own background), Francesconi asked Potter to explain what he has done to support affordable housing.

Potter described his experience of serving as director of New Avenue for Youth after retiring from the Police Bureau, and the building of residential housing for homeless youth. He also said he had "volunteered with different programs" and said that what he has done as a private citizen is important. "I've done these things because I believe in them."

Francesconi responded first by saying he appreciated Potter's work with New Avenue for Youth, but said that the records of what the candidates have accomplished on public issues "are one of the criteria" voters should use to make their decision.

Taking his own turn to ask a question, Potter said that the next Mayor will have to make "difficult decisions" and take "principled stands" whether or not they are popular. He asked Francesconi why, despite marching in an anti-war protest, he voted against the Iraq resolution which came before City Council. "Is this your idea of leadership?" Potter asked.

Francesconi said he understood the possible political ramificaitons of his vote, but that "one of the privileges" given to him is to make tough decisions on issues important to the City, and that he didn't feel voters had given him the "authority to make foreign policy decisions." Calling it a "very difficult vote," he added that his vote in fact was an example of his "ability to make a tough vote."

Potter responded by arguing that it wasn't a matter of foreign policy, but about young Portlanders and Oregonians dying, and the cutting of Federal programs in order to pay for the war. "This is about what's going on in Portland, Oregon."

Attention turned to the City Council candidates and their chance to ask questions of each other.

Adams asked Fish if he had supported Mayor Vera Katz's decision a couple of years back to refuse to cooperate with a request from Attorney General John Ashcroft's Justice Department to participate in the questioning of local Arab- and Muslim-Americans.

Fish said he indeed had supported the Mayor on that decision, but that what went wrong was "the way it got communicated to the world." He also said that the right wing was trying to make some sort of example out of Portland. He also credited the way that, locally, Portland eventually acknowledged its over-reaction to the threat of terror in its initial decision to bury the reservoirs. He cited as one of Katz's strengths the fact that she has taken some "very controversial" decisions. (He wondered aloud whether any eventual monument to Katz should come in the form of an award from the ACLU, or a plaza or school named in her honor.) He said that already "history has vindicated" Portland's sensitivity to such issues. At the same time, he said the City made the right decision to participate in the local Joint Terrorism Task Force.

Adams began his own response by saying that it was "nice to hear some positive words for Vera Katz on any stage anywhere." He said that they'd "never been deluged with more hate mail ... under the guise of patriotism."

Fish asked Adams about his "centerpiece proposal" to register lobbyists, saying he agreed but that a "one size fits all" approach "shifts the focus off elected officials." He asked Adams what would have been different over the last 11 years if such a law had been in place.

Adams began by saying he thought that was the first time Fish had agreed with him about registering lobbyists. He explained that as it stands "we don't even necessarily know who the paid lobbyists are," but said that the proposal was not "the beginning and end" of reform. "There's a lot more that needs to be done," he said, citing campaign finance reform and opening up decision-making to public input. He repeated that "there is a difference between paid influence and citizen input." He also said that it's an issue he's drawn to in part because he "didn't come from one of those families" who have, or can afford, influence.

Winding down, the forum moved to the candidates' closing statements, beginning with the contenders for the City Council seat.

Fish noted at the start of his closing that he didn't receive a response to his question about what would have been different over the past 11 years if lobbyists had been required to register. "If I don't honor the trust you give me," he said, "blame me [and] vote me out of office." He said that "if we don't grow good jobs, none of the issues we care about in terms of quality of life" will be able to be addressed by the City.

Adams continued the back-and-forth. "We won't be able to hold you accountable," he said, "if we don't know who the lobbyists are." He repeated his call for transparency in order to regain trust. Somewhat echoing Fish's comment on near-term needs (in Fish's case, good jobs), Adams urged voters to "get out and help defeat ballot measure 26-48" -- the repeal of the County income tax. Without that tax remaining in place, he said, all the other things being talked about by the candidates become "that much more unreachable."

Potter said he's lived in Portland since he was six years old, and has had "many opportunities along the way," including 27 years with the Portland Police Bureau. "I love Portland," he said. "I want what's best for it." He said that he wasn't running for Mayor as "a stepping stone" to some higher office, and that he had "the wrong color hair for this to be long-term." He called for people to "come together" in order to "agree on what we want."

Francesconi picked up where Potter left off. "We do agree that we're not using the office of Mayor to run for higher office," he said. "My wife would leave me in a hot minute." He called the upcoming elections "very critical at a critical time," and offered three criteria for judging the candidates: Their civic engagement on tough issues, their record of involvement ("not what we say, but what we do"), and their prioirities and who they intend to accomplish them.

Which brings us, briefly, back to the member of the audience with whom we found ourselves in conversation outside the church after the forums conclusion. We don't want to delve too much into it, since it's only a single voter, but what we found most interesting was his attempt to distinguish between the style of candidates and the substance and content of what they were saying. But he was, as the headline indicates, confused about what decisions to make as a voter.

As we pointed out to him before leaving to return home: It's better to be engaged and confused than not engaged at all.

Posted at 02:57 PM | PermalinkComments (8) | TrackBacks (1)
More In 2004 Mayoral Campaign, Metro-Area Politics

« Previous Next »