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.

About

This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on March 28, 2006 12:54 AM. The previous post in this blog was Time(s) out. The next post in this blog is Dogged out. Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.

Archives

Links

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

Hap'nin' Guys
Tony Pierce
Parkway Rest Stop
Utterly Boring.com
Along the Gradyent
Dwight Jaynes
Bob Borden
Dingleberry Gazette
The Red Electric
Iced Borscht
Jeremy Blachman
Dean's Rhetorical Flourish
Straight White Guy
HinesSight
Onfocus
Jalpuna
Beerdrinker.org
As Time Goes By
Dave Wagner
Jeff Selis
Alas, a Blog
Scott Hendison
Sansego
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
Mireio
And Sew It Goes
Mile 73
Rainy Day Thoughts
That Black Girl
Posie Gets Cozy
{AE}
Cat Eyes
Rhi in Pink
Althouse
GirlHacker
Ragwaters, Bitters, and Blue Ruin
Frytopia
Rose City Journal
Type Like the Wind

Portland and Oregon
Isaac Laquedem
StumptownBlogger
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 Drink.com
Dave Knows Portland
Idaho's Portugal
Alameda Old House History
MLK in Motion
LoveSalem

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
Misterblue
Two Pennies
This Stony Planet
1221 SW 4th
Twisty
I am a Fish
Here Today
What If...?
Superinky Fixations
Pinktalk
Mellow-Drama
The Rural Bus Route
Another Blogger
Mikeyman's Computer Treehouse
Rosenblog
Portland Housing Blog

Wonderfully Wacky
Dave Barry
Borowitz Report
Blort
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
Maukie
Ride That Donkey
Singin' Horses
Rally Monkey
Simon Swears
Strong Bad's E-mail

Oregon News
KGW-TV
The Oregonian
Portland Tribune
KOIN
Willamette Week
KATU
The Sentinel
Southeast Examiner
Northwest Examiner
Sellwood Bee
Mid-County Memo
Vancouver Voice
Eugene Register-Guard
OPB
Topix.net - Portland
Salem Statesman-Journal
Oregon Capitol News
Portland Business Journal
Daily Journal of Commerce
Oregon Business
KPTV
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

Music-Related
The Beatles
Bruce Springsteen
Seal
Sting
Joni Mitchell
Ella Fitzgerald
Steve Earle
Joe Ely
Stevie Wonder
Lou Rawls

E-mail, Feeds, 'n' Stuff

Tuesday, March 28, 2006

Portland parks: the next scam?

Here's a little something bubbling beneath the surface at Portland City Hall: Apparently they're getting ready to start forming some kind of new "district" or "authority" for the city's parks. Under this idea, the Portland parks would be handed over to a new governmental entity that will free the parks bureaucrats from the messy financing hassles -- and accountability -- that they have to deal with as a regular city bureau. City Commissioner Dan Saltzman is apparently down with the program, which came up last month at a Parks Board meeting. Click here and scroll down to page 3 for the lowdown.

The funniest part is how the Parks Board members don't want the current City Council to try to stop them:

Rich Brown said he didn't want the current Council to dictate if Parks goes ahead with this idea. It may take five years to make the change, and there could be an entirely different Council then.
Of course, we can't do anything these days without a high-priced consultant hired on a no-bid contract. And guess whom the folks at Parks have pressed into service to figure out how to reconfigure the bureau: Parametrix, an outfit that has had its fingerprints on one development boondoggle after another in the Rose City, including the early days of the OHSU aerial tram [rim shot], when the lies and obfuscation were flying hot and heavy. A Parametrix person named named Sumner Sharpe, who "facilitated" some early tram meetings (sitting next to Matt Brown), is now spearheading the effort to change the parks from a regular city bureau to something murkier. Parametrix and Sharpe (who's also some kind of urban planning fellow at Portland State) are also in on the railroading of the Saturday Market for condos and wine and cheese shops. And in the past, he's hovered around the city schools' "surplus land" situation, as well as the Burnside-Couch couplet. Sharpe was listed in this piece in WW as a campaign confidante of Mayor Potter.

What a "planning, engineering, and environmental sciences" firm is doing advising people on local government organization is anyone's guess. But even if they're the right consultants for the job, is this a wise move to be considering? Putting the city's parks into a Tri-Met-, OHSU-, PDC- or streetcar-like entity, full of gubernatorial or mayoral cronies, not fully accountable to the City Council and the city's taxpayers, sure sounds like a recipe for disaster to me. And seeing a familiar "facilitation" artist in the picture at the outset of the process hardly inspires confidence.

You would think that Saltzman would know enough to leave this hot potato in the oven until after the election. Apparently not.

Comments (29)

Brown's comment says it all - great example of how bureaucracies "work".

It's unclear to me how this idea was first broached. Board members' comments and questions made it sound as if this meeting was the first time most of them had heard about it. Based on that assumption, who was part of the "selection process" to hire Parametrix? What's the problem they're trying to solve here?

You would think that Saltzman would know enough to leave this hot potato in the oven until after the election. Apparently not.

Maybe he's decided he's going to lose, and wants to head up this new entity when he's out.

A Parks District isn't Tri-Met-like, with appointed oversight. The model I could support would have an independent, directly-elected Board, like the Tualatin Hills Parks & Recreation district. The main virtues are that if the parks system is separate with a set allocation of property taxes, the city can't undercut the parks budget by passing levies then reducing General Fund support; also that a directly-elected Board answers to the voters and has ongoing accountability not affected by changes in Commissioner bureau assignments.

This idea has been brewing inside the Parks bureau and in the community for years. My approach would be to involve the neighborhoods in discussing it now, rather than hiring consultants to roll out a proposal.


This would be a good chance for Fireman Randy if he wants us to take his Blue Oregon Post Seriously and the rest of council to put thier actions where their mouths are and not let Portland Get TRAMMED again by the same cast of characters, particularly with our precious parks one of the assets that makes Portland so special.

This rasies the same questions as the reallocation of the million or so in GF resouces to by the SoWa Park you blogged about earlier.


http://www.zoominfo.com/Search/ReferencesView.aspx?PersonID=16174921


PS. I Googled on one of the other names that popped up in the minutes you posted. You recently bogged on McMinnville (Another one bites the dust in February 2005)

I particularly like the advice to "bottle and sell" what McMinnville has.

That's developer speak if I ever heard it, looks like that firm represents a fair share of them.

Amanda wrote,
"The main virtues are that if the parks system is separate with a set allocation of property taxes, the city can't undercut the parks budget by passing levies then reducing General Fund support"

How about our friend Tax Increment Financing and Urban Renewal? The biggest enemy of general funds.

This FY alone some $42 million is being diverted from basic services. Another $20 million from schools with larger diversions on the way.

All A-OK with the status quo.
They just keep telling us urban renewal doesn't use general fund money. Even as the drain grows to over $4 billion in assessed property value no longer being taxed for basic services and schools.

The Increment within the UR 12,000 acres is now larger than the frozen base.
More general fund property taxes from the UR districts are NOT going to basic services than are.
Now isn't that special?

All according to plan says the PDC.

Too bad the newspapers don't shed some light on how well it's all working.

Apparently they have ALL been lying for so long about UR that any new light would be an admission to their lying.

So mum's the word until newly elected people spill the beans.

if the parks system is separate with a set allocation of property taxes, the city can't undercut the parks budget by passing levies then reducing General Fund support; also that a directly-elected Board answers to the voters and has ongoing accountability not affected by changes in Commissioner bureau assignments.

Why not dismantle city government entirely, and have every municipal function be its own "district"? We could have a police district, a fire district, a pothole repair district... I'd love to see a separate vote on "urban renewal" taxes -- nearly 20 cents of every dollar of property taxes that the city collects.

Switching to a parks district would only make sense, in my view, if the same services could be provided at lower cost. Perhaps the creation of a parks district would provide the City a legal avenue to dump its union employees and replace them with contracted labor. That would save a bundle.

I thought the parks were a potential profit center that can be bonded just like parking spaces downtown.

Some parks guy in Gresham wants Main City Park to host rental space, commercial and residential, to fund parks. Get it?

The next step is to confine the eligible renters of the "affordable housing," if on "parks," to city staff and friends . . . and use a waiting list to allocate who gets the housing. That allocation mechanism though will fully eliminate the need for "rent." They will be called . . . "stakeholders."

They might need a good security fence too.

It would take a direct hit from a nuclear tipped missile to get the city "to dump its union employees and replace them with contracted labor. Nothing so unimportant as saving taxpayers "a bundle" will even get their attention.

First, let me say there are a large number of great people working for Portland Parks and Recreation; people who believe in providing great spaces for play, relaxation and learning. All walks of life can benefit, and better themselves, from what a quality parks and recreation system provides. It's hard to say the same about many other government services.

Portland Parks and Recreation would therefore seem to be one of the most essential services we have. Yet, you will always see (especially in a city) parks and recreation coming out on the bottom of the pile come budget time when cutting up the pieces of the pie. Police, fire, building departments, and other divisions are often considered far more "essential" than parks and recreation. This continual battle often leads to the discussion of forming a stand-alone district. It's much like being the youngest sibling in a big family, trying to get your word in edgewise. And when the "family" is as dysfunctional as the City of Portland, you can see why Portland Parks wants to fly the coop. I can't blame them. Vancouver is rolling right through the exact same process at the moment, and it just so happens their Director is the former assistant director for the City of Portland Parks and Recreation Bureau, David Judd.

I see the fact they have hired a consultant is a hot item. Generally, governments need assistance to put together such a study with some outside input and perspective. But who they have hired will certainly continue the trend of large high end firms pulling up to the government money trough and going to town to help pay the rent on their bitchin' office space. Get a copy of their budget for the project and see how many hours they think it will take to complete even the simplest of tasks. I haven't seen it, but my guess is they have dozens upon dozens of hours dedicated to the arduous tasks of "document review", "project setup", or something else the average person would say "it takes that person 180 hours do to what?". Message is, too bad they couldn't have hired a smaller firm that still knows how to bust their butt for a reasonable fee and do innovative, fresh work. Chances are another firm might not be as incestuously connected as this one.

It will certainly be interesting to see who will lead them to this promised land of an independent district. Portland Parks has gone from being under the leadership of Charles Jordan, who was an engaging, connected (all the way to the White House), and driven individual who knew how to play the political game very well, to Zari Santner, who has drained the confidence and respect of vast numbers of her employees to the point of having a website dedicated to bashing her leadership of the Bureau. I would question whether it's her vision for the future of parks and recreation in Portland driving this process, or City leadership getting rid of a pain in the rump and drain on the City's budget. It would be a shame to see the parks system hurt further by this process.

It is true some special districts or stand-alone agencies have less than stellar track records. But far more are examples of excellent government service. If Portland Parks became an independent district at least if you had a problem with your parks and recreation system you would go straight to the source. You wouldn't have to interact with leadership that was dealing with funding a tram, a NBA team, schools, or any one of a number of other things outside of what makes a city the "City that Works".

rickynagg spouts off: "It would take a direct hit from a nuclear tipped missile to get the city "to dump its union employees and replace them with contracted labor. Nothing so unimportant as saving taxpayers "a bundle" will even get their attention."

I'm curious as to why it is that so many people think that dumping union employees is going to save so much damned money. What's the deal?

You people don't want folks to earn a decent wage? Is that it? Or, are you just jealous because these people were smart enough to negotiate (in good faith, no less) for things like weekends and decent benefits?

If you want to save money on the city level, don't look to the beleaguered unionized employees, try removing a couple of layers of management and some top brass. These people get paid outrageous sums (often multiples, or even double digit multiples of the average union employee) to do things like lie to city commissioners, engage in illicit and illegal behavior with public funds, envision new ways to feather their nest and those of their friends and families through innovative uses of public financing and inside help and information on city processes.

I work in another huge bureaucracy here in the city, and what happens is the managers, who don't like having to live to the stipulations of the contract language (which they were often responsible for negotiating on behalf of the employing institution), hire lower level managers to deal with these "unpleasant" tasks, thus insulating themselves from the staff and allowing them more time to "envision" new ways to tap into those tax dollars.

Get your priorities right...The people who need to be replaced are all higher up the status scale than union employees....They are managers, and their friends, consultants.

Amanda Fritz at March 28, 2006 09:23 AM The model I could support would have an independent, directly-elected Board, like the Tualatin Hills Parks & Recreation district. The main virtues are that if the parks system is separate with a set allocation of property taxes, the city can't undercut the parks budget by passing levies then reducing General Fund support; also that a directly-elected Board answers to the voters and has ongoing accountability not affected by changes in Commissioner bureau assignments.
JK: Sounds good. How about doing that to any city agency with a budget of over , say, 10 mil?

I would just love to vote on the head of PDOT and their priorities.

Same for the water bureau.

Could make the city council mostly redundent.

Thanks
JK


I suspect a lot of this has occurred because in Portland there have been two political sacred cows: parks and libraries. Starve these two while diverting revenues to other not-so-beloved programs and watch the citizens scramble to do fund-raising....or vote a new bond measure.

"If you want to save money on the city level, don't look to the beleaguered unionized employees"

Oh, please, now the city's unionized employees are "beleaguered"? 'Don't look over here at us, for God's sake, we're just hard workin', good faith negotiatin', poor union schlubs.' Even mentioning the cost of union labor is off limits. Just look over there (waving arms and yelling) at what management is skimming off the top.

"You people don't want folks to earn a decent wage? Is that it? Or, are you just jealous because these people were smart enough to negotiate (in good faith, no less) for things like weekends and decent benefits?"

There's that "you people" again. I make a comment that the city is unlikely to seriously consider privatizing much of anything it does and incur the wrath of godfry. Hey, don't leave out that we "hate children", too. I'm sure there's plenty of deadwood in every layer of city government - including union workers.

"The people who need to be replaced are all higher up the status scale than union employees"

Now there's an honest, comprehensive look at waste in city government. NOW we know where the problem lies.

Thanks for straightening us out.

Godfry:

The bidding out of contracts for city services doesn't cut wages. Unions often win these bids anyway. What it does is eliminate the three other guys standing around watching the one guy work. Now, the one guy gets paid and either the other three guys do something productive or they get a job elsewhere, again, doing something productive.

Having a payroll of union (or non-union) folks waiting for marching orders is very expensive. Having a contract staff doing a specified job is much cheaper, even at the same wage/benefit level.

This is what the current council doesn't get. This is the kind of knowledge a guy like Lister has.

It's not about "race to the bottom" philosophies or other (unprovable) nonsense. It's about extracting maximum porductivity for your investment.

How about making the Parks Bureau and a few other government agencies non-profit corporations
and take them off the tax dollars?
Canada turned its air trafic controller's agency into a non profit agency some years ago with some great results.
M.

Just as long as the consultants aren't Montgomery Watson Harza, who would report back in a few months that our parks are a terror target and need to be buried.

LOL, b!X. It always struck me as wildly arrogant to think we would be considered a target for anything.

ROFLMAO

Wow, rickynagg...

You need to get a grip.

Y'know, not once in my years have I seen any politician run on reigning in the bloated bureaucracy by streamlining the management of any governmental unit, yet the call from fascist ideologues to gut the unions to realize savings is perennial.

Yet, most union members have been losing ground to spiralling health care costs and inflation to the effect that their net pay has shrunk over the past ten years. That certainly does not seem to be the case with CEOs or managerial types at all. Bureaucracies tend to be top-heavy, and the top ain't where the unionized employees are.

And, Don? I never stated that contract city services reduces wages. I merely asked as to why it is that it's always the union employees who get dissed in these discussions, while non-union management personnel gets off scot-free. I'm perfectly aware that contracting services can realize cost-savings in some cases. In other cases, contracting out can lead to gouging, cost-overruns and sweetheart deals...all at much greater cost to the taxpayer than maintaining a unionized workforce.

If there are three workers standing around watching one, either there's a good reason for it, or the supervisor/manager is not doing his/her job. And nobody even flipping whispers about those three hour alcoholic lunches and early clock-outs (not being on the clock at all -- manager, y'know) to go golfing? Talk about wasting taxpayers' (or, in the private sector, customers and stockholders) money.

What's the matter, ricky? Did I hit too close to home? You're the one doing all the hand-waving.

Godfry:

I'm all about trimming management fat. Your post just made it seem as though it's management versus labor. I think we're in agreement, just emphasizing different aspects. I lump management in with "public employees" for this discussion. You're right, three guys holding up shovels IS a management problem, but the solution isn't to trim management or their perks, it's to change the model. If everyone SHARES IN THE PROFITS - labor included - there's a motivation to be productive.

JP & Ricky --

Spin off Parks? Hmm, the strucure described in the Parks Bureau minutes uses different labels, but looks, smells and feels a LOT like the PDC. Dedicated source of tax funds from city taxpayers, no direct accountability to council for actions, and complete insulation from economic and revenue realities facing all other city services.

And all in the name of the sacrosanct parks.

If you like the PDC you'll love the spun off Parks Bureau.

But in a city where the pols on the council have ignored for years the prime responsibility of any municipal government -- public safety -- to each pursue their own pet projects and pandering to the interes groupd who elected them, its not surprising.

After all, we're going to spend $ 200,000 on jump starting Potter's re election --- er, no, I mean doing a "visioning" project, when we should be focusing on the ruinous fire police pension plans.

Parks, parks, wonderful parks. Gotta' love Portland.

Regarding union vs. management, the lowest paid unionized City employee I could find (Maintenance Worker) makes about $20,700 a year at entry-level. [There are lower paid staff, but most are in part-time or seasonal positions.] I remember reading that the highest paid City employee (I think it's usually the CAO or the Police Chief) makes about $150,000 a year. That's 7.25 times the bottom, which is much, much less than the difference in the private sector. The City has very few six-figure employees, and they are all heads of bureaus or large divisions.

What the City needs is more flexibility to manage all of its employees, union and non-union. And let's face it, the union protects all of its employees, even the ones who are worthless. That's no better than management protecting its own, and it doesn't do much to improve the standing of the union, either. What the City needs is civil service reform that gives more flexibility in hiring and firing of all employees.

More to the topic at hand, the separation of Parks into its own governmental entity with dedicated resources just contributes to the overall problem of Portlanders (and Oregonians in general) demanding government services but being unwilling to pay for them. Yes, Parks takes a back seat to Police and Fire in annual budget decisions, and that drives parks supporters crazy. But separating parks from those decisions and dedicating a chunk of our property taxes just exacerbates the problem of funding other government services. It's not a solution for anyone except Parks.

I used to know Sumner Sharpe pretty well. I've always thought highly of him. He was my mentor when I was an undergraduate at PSU.

However, you need to know that he, and by extension, Parametrix, are "hired guns". They consult for a fee, paid by a client. I'd bet that they work toward the client's interests, whoever they might be.

When I last met him, he was emceeing the public meeting on the proposed tram *rimshot* at the Marriott in November 2003. He informed me that he had been hired to facilitate a process between the CAC for the affected neighborhoods and PATI. His objective was to represent the interests of the neighborhoods to PATI, OHSU and the City. He indicated that he had been hired by the CAC, not PATI. He was evidently part of the process for those neighborhoods to put the screws to the City over the long ignored improvements which were supposed to happen to reroute the traffic around the west end of the Ross Island Bridge...which suddenly became a lever when OHSU and the developer crowd wanted to hang out their laundry above their homes.

As for his personal motives, I can't speak for him.

Look to his recent community-minded effort, the revision of the City Charter. He, and his wife, former City Commissioner Margaret Strachen, were appointed to the Charter Review Commission by the in-coming Mayor Potter. I assume he's not getting beaucoup bucks for this assignment, as he was listed as a "volunteer".

If this Charter Commission doesn't come out of its sessions with a means of reigning in PDC, then we'd have a good idea where his head is at, as it was my understanding that that was one of the specific tasks which Potter wanted assigned to the Charter Commission.

Sumner used to work for an outfit known as Cogan & Associates, along with owners Elaine and Arnold Cogan. And, yes, as noted, he used to teach in the Urban Studies Program at PSU. He's been around Portland since I was a college student, so he's been here for better'n thirty years. Last I heard, he and Margaret lived on the eastside, in the Alberta neighborhood

Just to expand on what I started earlier regarding making this a non profit and taking it off the tax dole.

Some years ago I read an article about cities
in the eastern U.S. that were losing their middle class and one of the reasons cited was that they were exempting many organizations from property taxes. Boston was a particular case mentioned and
I seem to recall that about 50% of the property in Boston was exempt from that tax. Of course these non profits still received government services, but at no cost. That is, the city gave away services to some and expected others to pick up the cost. Portland is doing exactly that.

One way to end that would be to abolish the property tax and go to a direct billing service for services rendered. Portlanders get billed for water and sewer regularly. Why not do something similar with these other services?

If it can't be done with all of them then maybe some of them can be handled this way.

Secondly the departments, er bureaus might be more responsive to the monetary issue. I especially get a kick out of seeing the Fire Bureau send hook and ladder trucks to medical emergencies. That's not exactly the fastest way to respond, but it does eat up a lot of money over the course of a year.
M.


These folks may be on the right track.

The neighborhoods do need a New DEAL.

It amazes me that Richmond Neighborhood which has the same occupancy stats headcount wise as the new SoWa has been waiting for modest funding thier park since 1991, while faithfully paying there taxes, that go to the general fund, and the best I can figure their share of Parks funding is about 10x what they receive in thier one existing park.

A similar situation exists in East County with the Storm Water runnoff Sewer system, where those folks pay but they don't use the service. All those folks had to sign up for leins on thier property and the EZ payment plan to pay for their sewer hookups. Can the same be said for SoWa and The condo construction that caused the collapse of the Sewer on Burnside a few months ago.


http://www.portlandtribune.com/archview.cgi?id=34426

I knew Sumner Sharpe, too,though not well, when I went through the MUP program at PSU in the early 80s. I thought very highly of him; he did his best to help students; when I was job hunting and asked him for ideas , he wrote me a long letter full of good ideas on how to proceed. He's very bright and in those days was neigborhood oriented. I get the impression he doesn't like to stir things up, though. But that he will listen to people who do.

Miles noted: Regarding union vs. management, the lowest paid unionized City employee I could find (Maintenance Worker) makes about $20,700 a year at entry-level. [There are lower paid staff, but most are in part-time or seasonal positions.] I remember reading that the highest paid City employee (I think it's usually the CAO or the Police Chief) makes about $150,000 a year. That's 7.25 times the bottom, which is much, much less than the difference in the private sector. The City has very few six-figure employees, and they are all heads of bureaus or large divisions.

Okay... That's good to hear. At the public institution I work for here in Portland, the CEO makes 15 times what I do, and I'm far from being the lowest paid employee here. I'd guess that our CEO is making in the range of 30 times what an entry-level maintenance worker does. Of course, if we're talking "custodial" staff here, my employer outsourced all that to a private non-profit that employs the disabled....at who knows what suppressed wages. The result of this management decision is that the work is now done at a much more "slap-dash" efficiency and at much less frequency (the trash can under my desk gets emptied once a month, so the staff has taken to dumping their desk trash recepticles into the larger public recepticles. Net result: Crappier service. And that's just one stinkin' instance.

Oh... On my way to work yesterday, the bus had to skirt around a project in the street. As we passed, I noted that one man was seven feet down in a hole in the street, while two others stood around talking to the flagwoman....the logo on the side of the work vehicle: NW Natural.

You better get on their ass, ricky.


Sponsors


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

In Vino Veritas

If You See Kay, Red 2011
Turnbull, Old Bull Red 2010
Cherry Tart, Cherry Pie Pinot Noir 2012
Trader Joe's Grand Reserve Cabernet, Oakville 2012
Benton Lane, Pinot Gris 2012
Campo Viejo, Rioja, Reserva 2008
Haden Fig, Pinot Noir 2012
Pendulum Red 2011
Vina Real, Plata, Crianza Rioja 2009
Edmunds St. John, Bone/Jolly, Gamay Noir Rose 2013
Bookwalter, Subplot No. 26
Ayna, Tempranillo 2011
Pete's Mountain, Pinot Noir, Haley's Block 2010
Apaltagua, Reserva Camenere 2012
Lugana, San Benedetto 2012
Argyle Brut 2007
Wildewood Pinot Gris 2012
Anciano, Tempranillo Reserva 2007
Santa Rita, Reserva Cabernet 2009
Casone, Toscana 2008
Fonseca Porto, Bin No. 27
Louis Jadot, Pouilly-Fuissé 2011
Trader Joe's, Grower's Reserve Pinot Noir 2012
Zenato, Lugana San Benedetto 2012
Vintjs, Cabernet 2010
14 Hands, Hot to Trot White 2012
Rainstorm, Oregon Pinot Gris 2012
Silver Palm, North Coast Cabernet 2011
Andrew Rich, Gewurtztraminer 2008
Rodney Strong, Charlotte's Home Sauvignon Blanc 2012
Canoe Ridge, Pinot Gris, Expedition 2012
Edmunds St. John, Bone-Jolly Gamay Noir Rose 2012
Dark Horse, Big Red Blend No. 01A
Elk Cove, Pinot Noir Rose 2012
Fletcher, Shiraz 2010
Picollo, Gavi 2011
Domaine Eugene Carrel, Jongieux 2012
Eyrie, Pinot Blanc 2010
Atticus, Pinot Noir 2010
Walter Scott, Pinot Noir, Holstein 2011
Shingleback, Cabernet, Davey Estate 2010
Coppola, Sofia Rose 2012
Joel Gott, 851 Cabernet 2010
Pol Roget Reserve Sparkling Wine
Mount Eden Chardonnay, Santa Cruz Mountains 2009
Rombauer Chardonnay, Napa Valley 2011
Beringer, Chardonnay, Napa Reserve 2011
Kim Crawford, Sauvignon Blanc 2011
Schloss Vollrads, Spaetlese Rheingau 2010
Belle Glos, Pinot Noir, Clark & Telephone 2010
WillaKenzie, Pinot Noir, Estate Cuvee 2010
Blackbird Vineyards, Arise, Red 2010
Chauteau de Beaucastel, Chateauneuf-du-Pape 2005
Northstar, Merlot 2008
Feather, Cabernet 2007
Silver Oak, Cabernet, Alexander Valley 2002
Silver Oak, Cabernet, Napa Valley 2002
Trader Joe's, Chardonnay, Grower's Reserve 2012
Silver Palm, Cabernet, North Coast 2010
Shingleback, Cabernet, Davey Estate 2010
E. Guigal, Cotes du Rhone 2009
Santa Margherita, Pinot Grigio 2011
Alamos, Cabernet 2011
Cousino Macul, Cabernet, Anitguas Reservas 2009
Dreaming Tree Cabernet 2010
1967, Toscana 2009
Charamba, Douro 2008
Horse Heaven Hills, Cabernet 2010
Lorelle, Horse Heaven Hills Pinot Grigio 2011
Avignonesi, Montepulciano 2004
Lorelle, Willamette Valley Pinot Noir 2011
Villa Antinori, Toscana 2007
Mercedes Eguren, Cabernet Sauvignon 2009
Lorelle, Columbia Valley Cabernet 2011
Purple Moon, Merlot 2011
Purple Moon, Chardonnnay 2011
Horse Heaven Hills, Cabernet 2010
Lorelle, Horse Heaven Hills Pinot Grigio 2011
Avignonesi, Montepulciano 2004
Lorelle, Willamette Valley Pinot Noir 2011
Villa Antinori, Toscana 2007
Mercedes Eguren, Cabernet Sauvignon 2009
Lorelle, Columbia Valley Cabernet 2011
Purple Moon, Merlot 2011
Purple Moon, Chardonnnay 2011
Abacela, Vintner's Blend No. 12
Opula Red Blend 2010
Liberte, Pinot Noir 2010
Chateau Ste. Michelle, Indian Wells Red Blend 2010
Woodbridge, Chardonnay 2011
King Estate, Pinot Noir 2011
Famille Perrin, Cotes du Rhone Villages 2010
Columbia Crest, Les Chevaux Red 2010
14 Hands, Hot to Trot White Blend
Familia Bianchi, Malbec 2009
Terrapin Cellars, Pinot Gris 2011
Columbia Crest, Walter Clore Private Reserve 2009
Campo Viejo, Rioja, Termpranillo 2010
Ravenswood, Cabernet Sauvignon 2009
Quinta das Amoras, Vinho Tinto 2010
Waterbrook, Reserve Merlot 2009
Lorelle, Horse Heaven Hills, Pinot Grigio 2011
Tarantas, Rose
Chateau Lajarre, Bordeaux 2009
La Vielle Ferme, Rose 2011
Benvolio, Pinot Grigio 2011
Nobilo Icon, Pinot Noir 2009

The Occasional Book

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: 212
At this date last year: 60
Total run 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