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 April 10, 2006 8:57 PM. The previous post in this blog was Is there an echo in here?. The next post in this blog is Emilie Boyles's "clean money" -- it's half gone. 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

Monday, April 10, 2006

Where those "clean" tax dollars are going

Well, it's that time again. The candidates for municipal office in Portland have reported on where their campaign money is coming from, and where it's going. For politics fans in town, it's a field day. Betsy over at Metroblogging Portland has picked up a couple of interesting things out of Emilie Boyles's expenditures -- including $15,000 paid to Vladimir Golovan, whose antics crashed her campaign -- and so we'll start elsewhere.

How about the godfather of "clean money" himself, incumbent Erik Sten? We already know where his "seed money" has been coming from. But what has he been blowing the taxpayers' dime on?

$10,600 to Grove Insight for polling. How much does it cost to find out that every pet project you've pushed for 10 years is now a liability?

$2,400 to Mandate Media for web services. This, of course, is the outfit run by Kari Chisholm, host of BlueOregon, where Portland "progressives" gather 'round the Kool-Aid and get defensive about Sten.

$2,033 to an advertising outfit in Omaha, Nebraska. What, he didn't use a Portland firm, like Gard & Gerber?

Just over $5,600 to C&E Systems to deal with the accounting and reporting hassles that come with being a political candidate in Portland.

And yes, the jugglers at his kickoff event did indeed juggle for free.

Actually, it could have been much worse. Still, pardon the broken record, but I don't think the average Joe out there in town should have paid for any of it before getting a chance to vote on the prospect.

Comments (32)

I'm doing "clean money" first. I care more about what I'm paying for than what the Goldschmidt folks are paying for -- they can more easily afford it.

I hope Mr. Sten and Ms. Fritz are prepared to return their money in the event of unforeseen, or foreseen, events.

Ron, your interplanetary musings often distract from the true issues.


Damn, I should get into polling. Or maybe bookkeeping.

He he! I think signature gathering among the Slavic community is much more lucrative.

But not sustainable :-)

Whether the citizens vote on it or whether it is passed by the city council is irrelevant to its' force of law. (The M37 case may be fresh on some people's mind to clarify that a legislative act and that of an initiative are identical for purposes of examining the validity of a statute, and the same for a city code provision as here.)

I did file to put my name on the ballot for the auditor slot and Mr. Blackmer's unique claim to a placement on the ballot is not based on merit or ethics that are amenable to review and oversight by a state board in Oregon in like manner to CPAs, but membership in a private out-of-state outfit with some non-US-citizen board members.

I did also file to be allowed to gather the signatures and the five dollar donations. I can gain standing on the issue of clean money and attack the validity of the scheme based on state law grounds and free speech with an eye toward voiding the delivery of money to anyone. Were I in the position of the auditor I could take a position that the present city code is not lawful, and so too could Mr Blackmer.

The adversarial position of both Mr. Sten and Mr. Blackmer would be problematic. Ms. Fritz would also be in an awkward position.

If they have spent their money and are ordered by a court to return it then this surely is game for discussion.

Earlier argument here and here.

Jack, this statement: I'm doing "clean money" first. I care more about what I'm paying for than what the Goldschmidt folks are paying for -- they can more easily afford it.
seems hypocritical for one who blogs incessantly about the incestuous and damaging impact that the "Goldschmidt" folks have had on this town.

The VOE folks would say that, even with warts, VOE is better than the "dirty money" of the past. What's your reply to that? Tossing rocks at Emilie Boyles is child's play. She's clearly an idiot and probably corrupt as well.

How would you fix the system?

I'm certainly not conceding it's a better system. Look at what's happened so far -- Sten has more money to play with than either Burdick or Lister, maybe more than both combined. And only one other candidate qualified for funding. She herself admits she would have run anyway.

I'm not sure it's worth it.

Assuming that it's a valid concept, the current comedy act needs a complete overhaul. First and foremost, it can't be funded out of property taxes. It needs to be made voluntary, as with a tax checkoff system, or at least clearly financed in a way that provides a complete firewall to property taxes.

Qualifying $5 contributions need to be restricted to check, money order, credit card, or some other method that provides a clear paper trail to the real donor. Only those whose signatures can be verified should be eligible to donate -- if that means only registered voters, fine. Maybe driver's license signatures could also be used.

There should be no exception to the $5 rule for "seed" money.

And most importantly, the system needs to be put up for a popular vote before it takes effect. But of course, that would kill it. As much as the "clean money" people deny it, they know it will go down in flames. Voters don't think tax dollars should be used to finance political campaigns. I'm sure Sten has a poll that clearly shows that, but you'll never see it.

I can't help but note that the Oregonian reports Amanda Fritz spending $15,000...just a little over what Emilie Boyles has paid her 16-year-old daughter to date.

Amanda's a very, very viable candidate, who worked damned hard at following the rules. (And, Jack, even if Amanda had run anyway --which I'm not sure is the case-- Saltzman would've been able to run with no limit on his campaign contributions...and with his flip-flop on the tram, there would be a lot of well-heeled developers feeling very generous.)

I do feel extremely frustrated over the lackadaisical attitude represented by the "investigation" of the perceived fraud of Boyles and company. We're going to let them spend the money unobstructed, with an investigation sorta kinda happening somewhere? Maybe? Yeah, the citizens will get it back from Emilie, if she's found guilty, with 12% interest? She'll be taking out a Payday Loan I suppose.

Walk out a bank after a hold-up, and caught red-handed, the police don't let you hang onto the money until your day in court. There needs to be a mechanism in this system --if its to remain viable, as I think it could-- that lets the City step in and freeze the assets of the campaign when there is readily apparent fraud.

In looking at Amanda's expenses, I see a lot of EFTs to Paychex, classified as wages, salaries, and benefits... While it is probably good that she is using a company to do payroll, so taxes are properly paid, etc. It would be nice to know who all those payments are going to. I, also, think it is interesting she has bought insurance, but hasn't appeared to buy any assets like computers, etc..

I'll have to spend some more time looking through all of these..


On your Blueoregon article, why don't you mention Saltzman is getting his money from the same type cast of characters and Sten's seed money while you are at it.

Remember the Fox News motto, fair and balanced, it goes both ways.


If you looked at the C&E for Amanda's campaign, you probably noticed the handwritten corrections made on the Paychex entries. Paychex is the company that manages our payroll and ensures taxes are paid ontime and that all paperwork is done accurately. I originally thought I needed to itemize each payment made by Paychex, but was told by the SOS Election division that it was not necessary and the "A" code was not the correct code for a payroll service.

However, we have nothing to hide and are glad to give more details on request. Therefore, the employees we paid through Paychex are: Nathaniel Applefield, Kelvin Hall, Adrienne Hill, Rita Oviatt, Kelly Thoen, and Bill Michtom, none of whom had any connection to Amanda Fritz prior to her campaign for City Council.

The insurance payment listed on the form was a requirement of our office lease, for liability indemnity. The campaign has purchased no computer or office equipment.

On your Blueoregon article, why don't you mention Saltzman is getting his money from the same type cast of characters and Sten's seed money while you are at it.

Undeniably true (and I've already given Erik's campaign a piece of my mind about it), but the denominations are $500 and $100, not $10,000 and $5,000, which I believe is still a HUGE step forward.

Although, it is probably obvious, I failed to state above that I am the treasurer for the Amanda Fritz campaign.

"Saltzman would've been able to run with no limit on his campaign contributions...and with his flip-flop on the tram, there would be a lot of well-heeled developers feeling very generous."

Right on Frank Dufay! Did anybody read the Oregonian article where Saltzman states that his new-found willingness to have the city cover the "unexpected" millions in new tram costs is the "right" thing to do even though "harmful to my campaign"?

Nice spin, Saltzman! Harmful, but appreciated by certain huge donors.

Uhhh... Erik Sten spent money on polling, web services, advertising and accounting...

Outrageous! None of his opponents spent cash on such foolish frivolties... or if they did, we'll read about it here, right?


Nice response. I'm with you on everything but the public vote. I'm a fan of legislatures, representation,and responsibility. If we don't like VOE, vote out the incumbents and have the new Council change the system.

We're already in deep trouble (in my opinion) in Oregon by sending everything to the electorate.

I just want to remind people that all this hubbub over campaign expenditures would not be possible without a very open reporting system where we can actually *see* the expenditures.

Browse on over to the FEC and look at some congressional campaign spending reports. There is lots and lots of wasteful spending that takes place in campaigns.

It's the nature of the business--trying to inform and educate hundreds of thousands of citizens in a month takes money, money, money.

By the way, I'm being just as hard on Chris over at BlueOregon.


let me get this straight:

We can't trust the voters to decide whether VOE is a good idea, but we can trust them to select a politician who can make that decision for them?

Is that really your position?

You don't like some of the decisions made by voters, so you'd prefer they have less authority with respect to important government decisions.

How progressive of you.

No campaign contribution limits.
Easily accessed, detailed disclosure of contributions.
Independent audits of compliance with above.
Harsh penalties for violations of disclosure laws.

If voters are too stupid to figure it out, then they get the government they deserve. (QED)

I, for one, don't need progressives' protection from the "confusion" of the real world of politics. Everyone who tries to 'splain it to you has an agenda; especially those who are trying to "help" you.

Help yourselves!

Tim: However, we have nothing to hide and are glad to give more details on request.

Tim, thank you very much for taking the time to come over here and answer questions. I assumed that you were using Paychex to make your life easier, as well as the employees of Amanda's campaign. I think that was a very good choice.

The only thing that seems a little weird to me, is that in addition to the Paychex, there are checks written directly to some of those people, again classified as Wages.

Also, do I understand the report correctly that some things are sort of double listed? (Once showing the expense itself, and the other showing who personally paid for it.) For example a 3/13 personal re-imbursement of $5693 to Patriot Signage appears to match to a check made out to yourself on 3/20. I have a feeling I have seen a lot of the signs that that $5693 paid for. :-)


Thanks for your post acknowledging the issue,

To follow up here is a copy of Ryan's City Hall Weblog,

You will note Salztman and Ginny are on the same endorsement "list"

Tuesday, April 11, 2006

PBA Endorsements
If you read the campaign finance reports, there's no surprises here. The Portland Business Alliance came out with endorsements today:

The Portland Business Alliance Board of Directors on Tuesday voted to
endorse candidates for a number of local elections. This endorsements
are as follows:

Multnomah County Chair: Ted Wheeler

City Commissioner (Public Works): Ginny Burdick

City Commissioner (Public Affairs): Dan Saltzman

Metro District 1: Rod Park

Metro President: David Bragdon

-- Ryan

Pancho -- I think the point Paul is trying to make isn't about voter trust, it's about whether or not the voters should vote on every government decision, or whether we should allow our representatives to make those decisions and then cast a ballot for or against that representative given the totality of their votes.

America was founded as a representative democracy. Oregon is leading the country in the move towards direct democracy. That has some serious costs, not least of which is that the "majority" often holds views that conflict with one another. A majority will vote to cut its taxes at the same time it votes to increase the number of state police and invest more in Oregon's higher education system. Individual votes on every issue will lead to a nightmare of conflicting statutes.

And yes, some of my opposition to direct democracy also is a result of the ignorance of large swaths of the public. When surveys show that less than 50% of Americans recognize the First Amendment when read to them, can name the President and Vice President, or can name all three branches of government, I have serious doubts about their ability to decide complex issues of public policy.

Just to be clear, I personally think public financing of elections is the perfect issue FOR a public vote, and I hope it gets one. But the larger point you made about voters being able to vote on every important government decision is, well, un-American.


Those were salary/wage advances.

Form 3a lists the specifics of the reimbursement checks, in this case one to Nathaniel Applefield and one to yours truly for yardsigns that I put on my personal credit card.


I don't think anyone advocated "...voters should vote on every government decision...". I think the point is that elitism, of the type that your comment demonstrates, has no bounds. Your statement: "I have serious doubts about their ability to decide complex issues of public policy" betrays the implicit prejudgement you use to support your point.

What's next? Only landholders can vote? Only college grads? Only white people?


Yes, that is my position, the same position taken by the Founding fathers, by most scholars and political philosophers.

I assume you mean the 19th century progressive, the same movement that, along with its many attractive features, included moralistic crusaders, religious zealots, and anti-immigrant groups?

Or do you mean that "liberals" or "progressives" must automatically assume that the mass public is best positioned to decide the complex issues of public policy?

I don't see that as progressive at all. That's populist perhaps. As well as being fundamentally wrong-headed. We don't have a direct democracy, and for good reason. We live in a republic.

You don't like VOE. Vote out the folks that voted for it.

rickynagg: easy reply. Everyone gets to vote. For candidates. That's it. There are the bounds, plain and simple. What's the problem?

Wow. It's startling to see a progressive wrapping himself in the federalist papers these days.

As if Jefferson and Madison would have approved of elected officials passing a law allowing them to draw their campaign funds from the public treasury but would have vehemently opposed allowing voters to decide if such were prudent.

Cut the cr@p.

You're an elitist who wants to have it both ways. Time to own up.

I'm sure that you help clamor for the registration of every 18-20 y/o MTV wastoid as a new voter because you think it will help get your favored candidates elected.

But you're also bothered that after all that effort by celebrities and rock stars to convince them that your soundbite candidates are "cool", those neophyte voters will also have the chance to weigh in on real public policy issues somewhere farther down the ballot.

The solution: remove the important decisions and let them vote for Leonardo DiCaprio's favorite candidate.

Introducing DemocracyLite. All the hip kids are drinking it.

The problem, Paul, is the lack of checks and balances. As Pancho asserts, and as the current mayor and city council demonstrate almost daily, organized, well-funded special interest groups can get almost anyone elected. It's the way we got Erik Sten, for example. How is the public served by suffering the vagaries of government by the obviously unqualified? Does it teach them a lesson? Is that the way the system works? Doesn't the same power vested in the citizens to elect representatives imply the right to change their minds - or to express their will at any time? The built-in inertia of representative democracy does serve a purpose - to help prevent anarchy. I don't think that's what's at stake here, do you? Besides, the Portland's weak mayor/city council system is as much an administrative as a legislative entity and, as such, doesn't really fit your "founding fathers" analogy.

As for Portland's city government, I agree with you that...

"I have serious doubts about their ability to decide complex issues of public policy."


"Just to be clear, I personally think public financing of elections is the perfect issue FOR a public vote, and I hope it gets one."

Interesting to see that your measure of the legitimacy of direct democracy is flexible when it comes to your personal judgements.

Government of the me, by the me and for the me.

Sorry, Abe.

I think this thread is dying, but . . .

Ricky, I think you are confusing my comments with Paul's. Regarding the public's ability to decide complex issues, do you think they have that ability? You accuse me of being elitist, but I view it as being honest. I am continually shocked by the level of ignorance about public affairs that exists amongst even well-educated people. If acknowledging that truth makes me elitist, so be it, but I'm curious why you think voters have either the time or expertise to weigh in on tax policy, economic development, health care, law enforcement, and all the myriad other issues that our elected officials must deal with. Isn't that what we pay them to do?

Do you ever wonder why Oregon's legislators seem even worse than the generally low bar set for state legislators? At least part of the reason is that in Oregon they don't have to solve the most pressing problems because someone will come along with an (often poorly written) intiative that solves it for them. Other states don't have that luxury. And even when Oregon legislators step up and make a hard decision, it gets referred to the voters. So they focus on their pet projects instead of doing the hard work required. And maybe you disagree, but I have a hard time seeing how the dozens of often conflicting initiatives passed in this state over the last 20 years have done us much good.

And finally, my belief that VOE should be voted on by the public doesn't have anything to do with my personal views on it. . . I support it, and it will almost certainly be repealed, so a vote is not in my best interest. It's because I believe there are some issues where it is appropriate for a popular vote. Changing the election process is one of them, and certainly the introduction of public financing is something the public should decide.

But the larger point is that we need politicians who spend the time understanding complex issues and doing what they think is right, not just what they think is popular. If we don't like what they do, we vote them out the next time and try again.

The public's ability to decide complex issues depends upon variables that are impossible to predict. Anyone who presumes to judge that ability arrogates undemocratic power. The public's right to decide them is basic. I also wonder whether your assessment of the quality of state legislators confuses cause and effect. As for the net effect of the system of I&R's, it all depends on how one has been affected - we probably disagree there - but I can't help wondering whether, if state government had been controlled by R's for the past couple of decades, you be singing a different tune.

At the federal level, I agree with you regarding the necessity for professional (in a good sense) politicians. At lower levels, especially the city level, I think "professional" politicians are a curse.

City government IS the place for direct democracy - that's where this dying thread started - representative government becomes more necessary and desireable at the state level. Even then, democracy is not so ungainly as to preclude initiatives and referenda as outlets for the popular will.

One too many.

Otherwise " WOULD be singing a different tune." and I'd be able to spell desirable.


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

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: 113
At this date last year: 155
Total run 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