Endorsement time
The Voter's Pamphlet is here, and the ballots won't be far behind. Here are my picks for the upcoming races in the Portland area:
Portland City Commissioner: Nick Fish. Sam Adams is just Vera Katz in men's underwear (I think). Deny it as he will, his fingerprints are all over PGE Park, the Convention Center expansion, the OHSU aerial tram, and one waste of taxpayers' dollars after another. He was Katz's "economic development" chief. Just look at the state of the city's economy, and his record speaks for itself. If he wants to hold public office, let him start in the state legislature, the county commission, or Metro, where he can prove he's not the kind of guy who would waste taxpayers' money to make Homer Williams and Neil Goldschmidt happy. He doesn't deserve a cakewalk onto the City Council. Quite the opposite.
Portland City Commissioner: Randy Leonard. Randy has done a lot to shake things up at City Hall, and in that sense, he has lived up to his previous campaign promises to be the outsider and represent a neglected constituency. I don't mind much that he's rubbed the neighborhood association types the wrong way. But I'm very concerned that he was flown down to Las Vegas to be named some national developers' group's pet politician of the year. And he's right there with a yes vote for the RiverPlace streetcar and the Pearl theater. Randy, I'm still with you, buddy. But the day you and I part company is definitely in sight: the day you vote to spend city transportation funds for an operating subsidy for that stinking aerial tram.
Mayor: James Posey. Jim Francesconi is West Hills money with an Alameda mailing address (don't forget, he's a proud director of Portland Aerial Transportation, Inc.). Gongg!!! But try as I might to warm up to his principal rival, Tom Potter, that guy is just a bag of vague platitudes. With all the problems Portland is facing, you would think he'd offer some specifics. Except for his expertise in running the Police Bureau (which alone tempts me to vote for him), however, Potter has presented nothing concrete to merit the mayor's office. At least Posey has looked the voters in the eye, spoken from the heart, and said some things that needed to be said. For example, abolishing the Portland Development Commission, because it's just a tool for the wealthy. Right on, James! He probably can't win, but a vote for Posey is a vote for a runoff, likely between Francesconi and Potter. And it would send a message to both of them. Good enough for now.
Busse? Nah. Anyone who says he's a politician and a journalist at the same time doesn't get my vote.
Multnomah County Commissioners: No endorsements. I am weary to the bone of the Sisters of Hawthorne. They bitch about the school funding situation, but then they retreat into an aromatherapy-filled back room and come out with their gay marriage adventure. Now the state is so polarized and paralyzed that any reasonable conversation about tax reform or restoring faith in government has been postponed indefinitely. They haven't administered the county income tax very well, either. I'm not going to endorse the anti-gay-marriage folks who popped up at the last minute to run against them. But I'm never going to urge people to vote for them, either. Indeed, I wish they had some credible opposition.
In the East County race, I endorse Lonnie.
Measure 26-53: No. On its face, it looks innocent enough: If a candidate for city office gets a majority vote in a primary, he or she automatically wins the position, rather than have to run unopposed in the general election. I guess it's supposed to save money, although seriously, folks, how many dollars are we talking about? Plus, if the victorious candidate is caught having sex with animals over the summer, why shouldn't he or she have to face the voters again in November? More importantly, I hear a rumor (although you'd never know it from the Voter's Pamphlet) that this measure would change the method for determining the number of signatures necessary for initiative and referendum petitions in future city elections. That alone deserves a closer look, which nobody's given it. Which adds up to a no vote from me.
Posted at 12:30 AM
| Permalink
Comments (8)
That ain't no rumor. First, it was in the League of Women Voters of Portland voters' guide to the primary, and then in the comments to my own "vote no" on this measure post, City Auditor Gary Blackmer said:
Your concern about the number of signatures might be easily allayed with the knowledge that the signature number is set by the City Code, which is voted on by City Council, not the voters. Voters will decide whether to end these single candidate runoffs and, if so, we will have Council change the formula to preserve the same number of required signatures (which is currently based on the number of November voters for City races).
Posted by The One True b!X | April 26, 2004 9:32 AM
As to Measure 26-53 changing the initiative and referendum required signatures - the numbers/percentages required for municipalities are set in the state constitution [Article VI, Section 1 (5)]; cities cannot require more than 15% of "qualified voters" for an initiative, and not more 10% for a referendum.
Is there some concern that this will change how we determine "qualified voters" for municipal elections? Any information you could provide on this would be greatly appreciated.
Posted by auggie | April 26, 2004 9:46 AM
As a big Randy Leonard fan, I was thrilled to hear about his proposed monorail that will run from St. Johns to Mount Tabor. The whole project will cost $1-2 million, and will be financially self-sufficient. Finally, we’ll get a monorail like Shelbyville.
Posted by ptb | April 26, 2004 11:17 AM
It will change qualified voters. If you click through to my item and read the quote from the LWV guide, it says that the formula will be changed from "percentage of votes cast in the preceding general election" to a formula "based on the number of registered voters."
Posted by The One True b!X | April 26, 2004 2:46 PM
In the East County race, I endorse Lonnie.
Heh.
Posted by Jeff | April 27, 2004 12:44 PM
What exactly is wrong with the aerial tram? :confused:
Posted by torridjoe | April 27, 2004 4:50 PM
The problem with the tram is that it will attract fine women to our community, and this is a men's blog, if you know what I mean. Pass me a towel.
Posted by turbi | April 28, 2004 11:08 AM
Aerial trim?
Sorry, couldn't resist.
Posted by torridjoe | April 28, 2004 12:01 PM