Detail, east Portland photo, courtesy Miles Hochstein / Portland Ground.

For old times' sake
The bojack bumper sticker -- only $1.50!

To order, click here.

Excellent tunes -- free! And on your browser right now. Just click on Radio Bojack!

E-mail us here.


This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on January 18, 2006 6:49 AM. The previous post in this blog was When you don't care enough to send the very best. The next post in this blog is Is the aerial tram all about OHSU parking?. Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.



Law and Taxation
How Appealing
TaxProf Blog
Mauled Again
Tax Appellate Blog
A Taxing Matter
Josh Marquis
Native America, Discovered and Conquered
The Yin Blog
Ernie the Attorney
Above the Law
The Volokh Conspiracy
Going Concern
Bag and Baggage
Wealth Strategies Journal
Jim Hamilton's World of Securities Regulation
World of Work
The Faculty Lounge
Lowering the Bar
OrCon Law

Hap'nin' Guys
Tony Pierce
Parkway Rest Stop
Along the Gradyent
Dwight Jaynes
Bob Borden
Dingleberry Gazette
The Red Electric
Iced Borscht
Jeremy Blachman
Dean's Rhetorical Flourish
Straight White Guy
As Time Goes By
Dave Wagner
Jeff Selis
Alas, a Blog
Scott Hendison
The View Through the Windshield
Appliance Blog
The Bleat

Hap'nin' Gals
My Whim is Law
Lelo in Nopo
Attorney at Large
Linda Kruschke
The Non-Consumer Advocate
10 Steps to Finding Your Happy Place
A Pig of Success
Attorney at Large
Margaret and Helen
Kimberlee Jaynes
Cornelia Seigneur
And Sew It Goes
Mile 73
Rainy Day Thoughts
That Black Girl
Posie Gets Cozy
Cat Eyes
Rhi in Pink
Ragwaters, Bitters, and Blue Ruin
Rose City Journal
Type Like the Wind

Portland and Oregon
Isaac Laquedem
Rantings of a [Censored] Bus Driver
Jeff Mapes
Vintage Portland
The Portlander
South Waterfront
Amanda Fritz
O City Hall Reporters
Guilty Carnivore
Old Town by Larry Norton
The Alaunt
Bend Blogs
Lost Oregon
Cafe Unknown
Tin Zeroes
David's Oregon Picayune
Mark Nelsen's Weather Blog
Travel Oregon Blog
Portland Daily Photo
Portland Building Ads
Portland Food and
Dave Knows Portland
Idaho's Portugal
Alameda Old House History
MLK in Motion

Retired from Blogging
Various Observations...
The Daily E-Mail
Saving James
Portland Freelancer
Furious Nads (b!X)
Izzle Pfaff
The Grich
Kevin Allman
AboutItAll - Oregon
Lost in the Details
Worldwide Pablo
Tales from the Stump
Whitman Boys
Two Pennies
This Stony Planet
1221 SW 4th
I am a Fish
Here Today
What If...?
Superinky Fixations
The Rural Bus Route
Another Blogger
Mikeyman's Computer Treehouse
Portland Housing Blog

Wonderfully Wacky
Dave Barry
Borowitz Report
Stuff White People Like
Worst of the Web

Valuable Time-Wasters
My Gallery of Jacks
Litterbox, On the Prowl
Litterbox, Bag of Bones
Litterbox, Scratch
Ride That Donkey
Singin' Horses
Rally Monkey
Simon Swears
Strong Bad's E-mail

Oregon News
The Oregonian
Portland Tribune
Willamette Week
The Sentinel
Southeast Examiner
Northwest Examiner
Sellwood Bee
Mid-County Memo
Vancouver Voice
Eugene Register-Guard
OPB - Portland
Salem Statesman-Journal
Oregon Capitol News
Portland Business Journal
Daily Journal of Commerce
Oregon Business
Portland Info Net
McMinnville News Register
Lake Oswego Review
The Daily Astorian
Bend Bulletin
Corvallis Gazette-Times
Roseburg News-Review
Medford Mail-Tribune
Ashland Daily Tidings
Newport News-Times
Albany Democrat-Herald
The Eugene Weekly
Portland IndyMedia
The Columbian

The Beatles
Bruce Springsteen
Joni Mitchell
Ella Fitzgerald
Steve Earle
Joe Ely
Stevie Wonder
Lou Rawls

E-mail, Feeds, 'n' Stuff

Wednesday, January 18, 2006

"Clean money" goes on the ballot

Despite the best efforts of the Portland City Council, the city's voters are going to have their say on whether their tax dollars should go to pay for local politicians' political campaigns. The local business interests who are opposed to the city's new public campaign finance system have turned in way more than enough signatures to put it on the May ballot.

This is how it should be. The council should have known this was going to happen, and it should have referred "voter-owned elections" (formerly known as "clean money" before someone asked who had taken the "dirty money") to the voters originally. But it didn't, and now the opponents have forced it onto the ballot, with one strike against it already.

I predict (as I have here from the outset) that "clean money" is going to go down to defeat, and pretty hard. Even if it were the only thing on the ballot, it would have an awfully tough time passing, but as it turns out, it will be voted on at the same time as (a) a desperate pitch by the city for more money for the public school system, and (b) the contested re-election bid of Commissioner Erik Sten, godfather of "clean money," who will likely have cashed in on the new system himself. All that, plus the fact that the council pushed it through without offering the voters their say, adds up to a witch's brew of negatives that will likely doom this program, at least in its current form. Not to mention the continuing controversy over the aerial tram [rim shot], the police and fire retirement and disability fiasco, another run at a tax abatement for the Alexan tower in the SoWhat district, and probably other questionable expenditures of public money that will be in the headlines throughout the campaign.

Whatever the merits of "clean money" may be, this may very well boil down to a referendum on the City Council's priorities. Mayor Potter wants to channel all the discontent in that area into his friendly little study groups, but unfortunately, he and his colleagues are about to get an earful of "vision" at the ballot box on May 16.

In light of who's leading the opposition to "clean money," I'm not as down on it as I used to be. I might even vote for it. But especially given the way it was handled, I suspect it's going to be a short-lived experiment indeed.

Comments (24)

If it was "voter owned elections" then why didn't they let the owners vote? Even though they promised us a vote in a few years, "after a chance to see how it worked" that promise was hollow. The current council cannot bind a future council to put that vote on the ballot. I believe that was Randy Leonard's reason for his no vote, and rightly so.

Trammell Crow Residential has withdrawn its tax exemption application for the Alexan project.
John F. Warner
Sr. Development Manager
Portland Development Commission

Well, either the voters own the elections or the developers do. Your choice. Indeed, anyone who looks at who contributes to local elections will find that developers buy influence. You can split hairs between "access" and "influence" but it's naive to think it's any other way.

We elect the people who run the government for us. Why do we need voter ratification of what they do? If we need that, why do we need them at all? If we don't like what they do, can't we just run them out?

So, in your world, I suppose we should allow the voters to vote on every single budget item that exceeds one one-thousandth of the total budget. (Which is what VOE is estimated to cost.)

We don't elect the council to think for us. We elect them to run the city. Their job is to provide cops, firefighters, parks, streets, sewer and water. They have too much authority as it is. Those five guys can vote to put all of us into any amount of debt to cover any bond, without limitation. Soon they will ask us to give them the authority to levy a citywide income tax, an authority that they currently do not have.

Unless I'm mistaken the city charter says that council members must recuse themselves from any vote in which they may have a conflict of interest. How was it not a conflict of interest for them to vote on a system of campaign financing that could potentially benefit all of them? If they'd conformed with the charter, they should have all recused themselves and the ordinance would never have come to a vote.

"We don't elect the council to think for us."

Well, yes we do. Unfortunately, you can't run a government without a little bit of thinking. (That may in fact be the crux of some of the problems with government.)

"How is it not a conflict of interest . . . .?"

Since all candidates would have access to the "voter-owned elections" fund, I don't see the conflict of interest. In fact, given an incumbent's advantage in fund-raising and general voter recognition, I would think the program favors outsiders over incumbents.

"They have too much authority as it is. Those five guys can vote to put all of us into any amount of debt to cover any bond, without limitation."

Bah, Chicken Little, the same was said about Katz and before her Clark and even back to ole Goldy, the sky still hasn't fallen, or our credit rating for that matter! If the people in Portland were so disinfranchised with their leadership, these five guys wouldn't be sitting on the council.

Kari, you have become a very argumentative fellow lately.

or our credit rating for that matter!

I'm so tired of this mantra. Read the City Club report on the police and fire pension, and I think you'll see that the sky really is about to fall.

you might be tired of it Jack, but if the credit rating agencies were overly concerened our leaders were ignoring the severity of the pension problem, or even that our elected leaders were carelessly spending money on "voter owned elections" or "money pit trams" for that matter, they would have previously dropped the city's rating a long time ago; similiar to what they did to the state a few years back. Obviously, since they aren't trying to stir up web page hits with overblown controversy, they can probably look at the picture a bit clearer than yourself.

Obviously, since they aren't trying to stir up web page hits with overblown controversy, they can probably look at the picture a bit clearer than yourself.

Oh, you wound me. Guess I'll close up shop.

Kari's attitude is typical..."it's only 1/1000th of the budget."

Problem is, when frivolous, non-essential spending is added up, it turns out to be a hell of a lot more than 1/1000th of the budget.

Maybe, just maybe, that 1/1000th of the budget should be spent on infrastructure or safety. Something essential.

Kari sells web sites to politicians for a living. "Clean money" may be more than 1/1000th of his budget.


As someone with three (soon to be four) children in our public schools, I'm disappointed to see this on the ballot along with the income tax.

I hope the tax doesn't get swallowed in negativity about the elections proposal. If we don't staunch the 50 million dollar wound in the schools budget, we're in deep trouble.

Kari et al:

Supporters of "Clean Money" originally planned to put the issue on the November 2005 ballot. While part of the strategy was to create a wedge issue in the mayor's race, the principle of letting the voter's decide whether to adopt public financing of council races was right.

In other jurisdictions that have adopted public financing, like New York City, the issue was addressed through charter reform.

We elect people to decide how tax dollars should be spent. Where those dollars might benefit our elected officials directly in their campaigns for reelection, a vote of the people, prior to implementation, is not unreasonable or without precedent.

Nick Fish

Nick, the counter to your argument is that by placing it on the ballot before voters actually experience a full cycle, you're subjecting the idea to the same kind of big-money sound bite politics that this is an antidote for.

But the whole point is academic since it now appears to be on the ballot.

So where do you stand on the ballot question? Yes - repeal it, or No, keep it?

I'm kinda happy to see that no one's touched on the point I'd like to make yet: assuming The Oregonian's report isn't simply out to make the opposition look stupid, the opponents of public reform are being just a wee bit dishonest in tying public campaigns to the schools shortfall.

Overall, though, let the public vote on it. What's the harm in that? Kari's got that point about it's miniscule fiscal impact, but that's a bit beside the point. Money isn't the correct measure for this anyway; this is about electoral mechanics and it's a pretty significant shift.

Should a prospective candidate need to suck up to the PBA to get enough money for a respectable campaign? Really, how much do we value our democracy? This is a question we're all asking at the federal level, and the same applies at the city level.

Jack-- you seem to get this when you refer to Abramoff and the GOP culture of corruption... why do you feel differently about efforts here? This was a bold move, and yet you're so quick to dismiss anything to do with the council...

The argument that it's not much money, is not persuasive to me. Look at all the dedicated neighborhood folks struggling to raise just a fraction of that amount to keep their community centers open. The city can't tell folks out of one side of their mouth -- we can't afford it, and out of the other side, oh that's just pocket change, finding that'll be no problem...

I'd suggest instead putting it in terms of return on investment. After all, you've got the PBA folks moaning about what a mess our city is in -- well, under just what election-financing dynamic were the folks elected who got us here?

Oh, yeah, let's have more of the same... You think?

It just may be that this experiment will result in the election of at least one city council candidate who will break the mold (and the hold) of certain entrenched special interests on our city. (I am a supporter of Amanda Fritz' candidacy.)

If that results in sharper questions being asked up front, and thus better decisions being made at the end of the day, then the system has certainly returned our citizen investment in it. (Just imagine if Amanda had been on the council, at the time she was raising questions on the Planning Commission about the tram?) Let's see, how many decades of elections might that alone have paid for?

So, though I've had some strong reservations about this plan, I'll not be voting to kill it now. If it fails, on the heads of the council who brung it -- be it. If it succeeds, we all win.

And, I can't imagine a clothes-pin strong enough to kill the stench if one were to crawl into bed with certain of the backers of this repeal effort. Yes yes, I know, it's about the children...

I wasn't going to jump back into this thread, but since Jack brings up the question of the websites I make for candidates...

Yes, it's true that I make my money from campaign spending. As I'm pretty sure we discussed either here on Blue some months ago, anything that reduces campaign budgets reduces my bottom line.

So, supporting VOE actually hurts me financially.

This is no longer a theoretical concern. I've now signed on with Sten and Saltzman (one VOE candidate, one not). In both cases, with a $150,000 budget (not the usual $500k city campaign), my proposed budget was substantially lower than I would otherwise propose. The work, of course, is also somewhat less -- though most of the hit comes out of my margin.

VOE is reducing campaign costs. As someone who feeds at that trough, that is to my personal chagrin.

I still support Voter-Owned Elections. Go figure.

If you're on Sten's campaign payroll, any opinion you offer on "clean money" is beyond suspect.

I joined his campaign a couple of weeks ago. I testified at City Council eight months ago.

I am building Erik's site because I support him, not the other way around.

In the past, on another campaign, I had an opportunity to work for either side (of a ballot measure). I ended up choosing to work for the side that was willing to spend 50% less money - because I agreed with the position.

How about a "try it you'll like it" foray into dedicating 10% of the PDOT budget on new sidewalks, secondary street improvements, and pedestrian trails (split evenly, three ways)?

Five years from now, after the good people of Portland have seen what can be accomplished without LID's or Don Baack's volunteer corps, I would bet they vote not only to retain, but to increase the earmark to 20%.

My point is, to earmark funds for a special purpose with the proviso "if we don't like it 5 years from now we can repeal it" is no way to select new budget initiatives in times of scarcity. Call it "trial and error" or "shoot from the hip" public policy. $2 million here and $3 million there, and pretty soon you're talking about real money.

If, five years from now, it turns out the SoWhat Ski Lift is a wildly expensive boondoggle that has little or no benefit to Portland Taxpayers, can we vote to rescind the City's contribution to OHSU and SoWhat?

How about a vote on PGE Park? A vote on building Wapato without an operating budget? A vote on Temporary Income Taxes that never expire?


As a lawyer/blogger, I get
to be a member of:

In Vino Veritas

Lange, Pinot Gris 2015
Kiona, Lemberger 2014
Willamette Valley, Pinot Gris 2015
Aix, Rosé de Provence 2016
Marchigüe, Cabernet 2013
Inazío Irruzola, Getariako Txakolina Rosé 2015
Maso Canali, Pinot Grigio 2015
Campo Viejo, Rioja Reserva 2011
Kirkland, Côtes de Provence Rosé 2016
Cantele, Salice Salentino Reserva 2013
Whispering Angel, Côtes de Provence Rosé 2013
Avissi, Prosecco
Cleto Charli, Lambrusco di Sorbara Secco, Vecchia Modena
Pique Poul, Rosé 2016
Edmunds St. John, Bone-Jolly Rosé 2016
Stoller, Pinot Noir Rosé 2016
Chehalem, Inox Chardonnay 2015
The Four Graces, Pinot Gris 2015
Gascón, Colosal Red 2013
Cardwell Hill, Pinot Gris 2015
L'Ecole No. 41, Merlot 2013
Della Terra, Anonymus
Willamette Valley, Dijon Clone Chardonnay 2013
Wraith, Cabernet, Eidolon Estate 2012
Januik, Red 2015
Tomassi, Valpolicella, Rafaél, 2014
Sharecropper's Pinot Noir 2013
Helix, Pomatia Red Blend 2013
La Espera, Cabernet 2011
Campo Viejo, Rioja Reserva 2011
Villa Antinori, Toscana 2013
Locations, Spanish Red Wine
Locations, Argentinian Red Wine
La Antigua Clásico, Rioja 2011
Shatter, Grenache, Maury 2012
Argyle, Vintage Brut 2011
Abacela, Vintner's Blend #16 Abacela, Fiesta Tempranillo 2014
Benton Hill, Pinot Gris 2015
Primarius, Pinot Gris 2015
Januik, Merlot 2013
Napa Cellars, Cabernet 2013
J. Bookwalter, Protagonist 2012
LAN, Rioja Edicion Limitada 2011
Beaulieu, Cabernet, Rutherford 2009
Denada Cellars, Cabernet, Maipo Valley 2014
Marchigüe, Cabernet, Colchagua Valley 2013
Oberon, Cabernet 2014
Hedges, Red Mountain 2012
Balboa, Rose of Grenache 2015
Ontañón, Rioja Reserva 2015
Three Horse Ranch, Pinot Gris 2014
Archery Summit, Vireton Pinot Gris 2014
Nelms Road, Merlot 2013
Chateau Ste. Michelle, Pinot Gris 2014
Conn Creek, Cabernet, Napa 2012
Conn Creek, Cabernet, Napa 2013
Villa Maria, Sauvignon Blanc 2015
G3, Cabernet 2013
Chateau Smith, Cabernet, Washington State 2014
Abacela, Vintner's Blend #16
Willamette Valley, Rose of Pinot Noir, Whole Clusters 2015
Albero, Bobal Rose 2015
Ca' del Baio Barbaresco Valgrande 2012
Goodfellow, Reserve Pinot Gris, Clover 2014
Lugana, San Benedetto 2014
Wente, Cabernet, Charles Wetmore 2011
La Espera, Cabernet 2011
King Estate, Pinot Gris 2015
Adelsheim, Pinot Gris 2015
Trader Joe's, Pinot Gris, Willamette Valley 2015
La Vite Lucente, Toscana Red 2013
St. Francis, Cabernet, Sonoma 2013
Kendall-Jackson, Pinot Noir, California 2013
Beaulieu, Cabernet, Napa Valley 2013
Erath, Pinot Noir, Estate Selection 2012
Abbot's Table, Columbia Valley 2014
Intrinsic, Cabernet 2014
Oyster Bay, Pinot Noir 2010
Occhipinti, SP68 Bianco 2014
Layer Cake, Shiraz 2013
Desert Wind, Ruah 2011
WillaKenzie, Pinot Gris 2014
Abacela, Fiesta Tempranillo 2013
Des Amis, Rose 2014
Dunham, Trautina 2012
RoxyAnn, Claret 2012
Del Ri, Claret 2012
Stoppa, Emilia, Red 2004
Primarius, Pinot Noir 2013
Domaines Bunan, Bandol Rose 2015
Albero, Bobal Rose 2015
Deer Creek, Pinot Gris 2015
Beaulieu, Rutherford Cabernet 2013
Archery Summit, Vireton Pinot Gris 2014
King Estate, Pinot Gris, Backbone 2014
Oberon, Napa Cabernet 2013
Apaltagua, Envero Carmenere Gran Reserva 2013
Chateau des Arnauds, Cuvee des Capucins 2012
Nine Hats, Red 2013
Benziger, Cabernet, Sonoma 2012
Roxy Ann, Claret 2012
Januik, Merlot 2012
Conundrum, White 2013
St. Francis, Sonoma Cabernet 2012

The Occasional Book

Marc Maron - Waiting for the Punch
Phil Stanford - Rose City Vice
Kenneth R. Feinberg - What is Life Worth?
Kent Haruf - Our Souls at Night
Peter Carey - True History of the Kelly Gang
Suzanne Collins - The Hunger Games
Amy Stewart - Girl Waits With Gun
Philip Roth - The Plot Against America
Norm Macdonald - Based on a True Story
Christopher Buckley - Boomsday
Ryan Holiday - The Obstacle is the Way
Ruth Sepetys - Between Shades of Gray
Richard Adams - Watership Down
Claire Vaye Watkins - Gold Fame Citrus
Markus Zusak - I am the Messenger
Anthony Doerr - All the Light We Cannot See
James Joyce - Dubliners
Cheryl Strayed - Torch
William Golding - Lord of the Flies
Saul Bellow - Mister Sammler's Planet
Phil Stanford - White House Call Girl
John Kaplan & Jon R. Waltz - The Trial of Jack Ruby
Kent Haruf - Eventide
David Halberstam - Summer of '49
Norman Mailer - The Naked and the Dead
Maria Dermoȗt - The Ten Thousand Things
William Faulkner - As I Lay Dying
Markus Zusak - The Book Thief
Christopher Buckley - Thank You for Smoking
William Shakespeare - Othello
Joseph Conrad - Heart of Darkness
Bill Bryson - A Short History of Nearly Everything
Cheryl Strayed - Tiny Beautiful Things
Sara Varon - Bake Sale
Stephen King - 11/22/63
Paul Goldstein - Errors and Omissions
Mark Twain - A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court
Steve Martin - Born Standing Up: A Comic's Life
Beverly Cleary - A Girl from Yamhill, a Memoir
Kent Haruf - Plainsong
Hope Larson - A Wrinkle in Time, the Graphic Novel
Rudyard Kipling - Kim
Peter Ames Carlin - Bruce
Fran Cannon Slayton - When the Whistle Blows
Neil Young - Waging Heavy Peace
Mark Bego - Aretha Franklin, the Queen of Soul (2012 ed.)
Jenny Lawson - Let's Pretend This Never Happened
J.D. Salinger - Franny and Zooey
Charles Dickens - A Christmas Carol
Timothy Egan - The Big Burn
Deborah Eisenberg - Transactions in a Foreign Currency
Kurt Vonnegut Jr. - Slaughterhouse Five
Kathryn Lance - Pandora's Genes
Cheryl Strayed - Wild
Fyodor Dostoyevsky - The Brothers Karamazov
Jack London - The House of Pride, and Other Tales of Hawaii
Jack Walker - The Extraordinary Rendition of Vincent Dellamaria
Colum McCann - Let the Great World Spin
Niccolò Machiavelli - The Prince
Harper Lee - To Kill a Mockingbird
Emma McLaughlin & Nicola Kraus - The Nanny Diaries
Brian Selznick - The Invention of Hugo Cabret
Sharon Creech - Walk Two Moons
Keith Richards - Life
F. Sionil Jose - Dusk
Natalie Babbitt - Tuck Everlasting
Justin Halpern - S#*t My Dad Says
Mark Herrmann - The Curmudgeon's Guide to Practicing Law
Barry Glassner - The Gospel of Food
Phil Stanford - The Peyton-Allan Files
Jesse Katz - The Opposite Field
Evelyn Waugh - Brideshead Revisited
J.K. Rowling - Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone
David Sedaris - Holidays on Ice
Donald Miller - A Million Miles in a Thousand Years
Mitch Albom - Have a Little Faith
C.S. Lewis - The Magician's Nephew
F. Scott Fitzgerald - The Great Gatsby
William Shakespeare - A Midsummer Night's Dream
Ivan Doig - Bucking the Sun
Penda Diakité - I Lost My Tooth in Africa
Grace Lin - The Year of the Rat
Oscar Hijuelos - Mr. Ives' Christmas
Madeline L'Engle - A Wrinkle in Time
Steven Hart - The Last Three Miles
David Sedaris - Me Talk Pretty One Day
Karen Armstrong - The Spiral Staircase
Charles Larson - The Portland Murders
Adrian Wojnarowski - The Miracle of St. Anthony
William H. Colby - Long Goodbye
Steven D. Stark - Meet the Beatles
Phil Stanford - Portland Confidential
Rick Moody - Garden State
Jonathan Schwartz - All in Good Time
David Sedaris - Dress Your Family in Corduroy and Denim
Anthony Holden - Big Deal
Robert J. Spitzer - The Spirit of Leadership
James McManus - Positively Fifth Street
Jeff Noon - Vurt

Road Work

Miles run year to date: 5
At this date last year: 3
Total run in 2017: 113
In 2016: 155
In 2015: 271
In 2014: 401
In 2013: 257
In 2012: 129
In 2011: 113
In 2010: 125
In 2009: 67
In 2008: 28
In 2007: 113
In 2006: 100
In 2005: 149
In 2004: 204
In 2003: 269

Clicky Web Analytics