The fair-and-balanced journalists over at Willamette Week have another dark but small piece of dirt (lint, almost) on Sho Dozono today (scroll down). That, and I'm "crotchety."
At least they agree with me, for the moment, about the guy in the dunce cap.
Comments (17)
Actuallly, what WW is doing seems vaguely similar to what Ricardson allegedly did.
They're very fixated on the whole phone thing. They didn't seem to care much when the city was spending money to robo-call people to attend one of Sam's famous phony "open houses" setting up his transportation tax.
Jack makes a good point about this tax going straight back to consumers. Most business effected on a usage basis would be local distributors (heating oil, beverages, etc) many of whom have exclusive territories, like your local trash collection. So a lot of that tax is going right back to the consumer. You have no choice. It's the independent plumbers, electricians, nurse practitioners, painters, and other small business folk who will have to absorb it, but even that will be temporary.
I wonder if Sam Adams (I believe he has a BA in Poly Sci from UO) would make his transcripts public, because I can't see that this man has the slightest understanding of economics and business, except how to pay back his donors.
Keep up with the "crotchety-ness" (not sure if that's a word, but I'll go with it). I'd like to think that you and the regular readers and commenters to your blog have helped bring about the vote by holding the Council's feet to the fire on this "fee" scam.
P.S. If Commissioner Adams really was a Poli Sci major at U of O, then surely at some point he learned that even the bluest of blue ribbon committees is no match for an election when it comes to seeking public input.
Adam's proposed "transportation fee" is an attempt to charge for street maintenance on the basis of "loading" on the system. Much like you pay a water bill based on water consumption. It is not an unusual fee approach, any longer, as cities across the nation adopt this approach. In 10 years, I bet more than 50% of cities nation wide will have this fee. It may not be right for Portland and maybe you all don't want to maintain your streets using this approach, but why don't you get accurate when you describe the fee approach itself? A vote on this funding approach seems appropriate and inevitable. But I doubt many of the posters here will criticise the legislation with any degree of accuracy or honesty.
If Jack is "crotchety", then maybe we need a "crotchety charrette" for the City Council. I wouldn't even mind an "off-site" in Sweden or France if it would boost attendance.
Plus, they might notice that even the Socialists are giving up on Socialism.
The load method (whatever phrase you choose) is used to match System Development Charges to, for example, new construction where typical rates of water consumption are calculated for basic categories of units.
Transferring water tax revenue (not fee) to the roads is not sustainable even with a public vote, provided anyone cares to litigate. In my honest opinion, which has no taxable commercial value anyway.
I think that a good remedy for the disposition of water tax collections, collected during litigation, should go to cover outstanding water bonds, or to lower the calculation of system development charges pertaining to water. That is, water fees/taxes (whatever) already have a designated slot in this clowns twisty balloon budget.
an attempt to charge for street maintenance on the basis of "loading" on the system. Much like you pay a water bill based on water consumption.
Come on, it's nothing of the kind. Only people who live or own a business in Portland will pay this "fee." Anyone else who uses the roads will not. It's more like a property tax than a road toll. A straight-up gas tax would make a lot more sense.
I doubt many of the posters here will criticise the legislation with any degree of accuracy or honesty.
Well then, we're all truly blessed to have you here, aren't we? And if it were up to your hero, Sam the Tram, there would have been no further debate or public vote. How's that in the honesty department?
outoftown appears to believe that our city lacks the money to pay to maintain roads. This is not true. We just spend hundreds of millions every year on unnecessary expenses. It's a simple problem: city council has more fun, gets invited to more lunches and gets more ego strokes from spending money on unnecessary "sexy" things than it does spending money on mundane expenses like fixing roads.
I can't figure out why some can't grasp how much money has been and is being misspent.
What does it take for these faithful followers to get it?
Sam the Tram does not tell the truth when he speaks. His carefully chosen words are intended to mislead. He is deliberate and conniving. Especially when it comes to mischaracterized revenue sources and spending.
His tenure at City Hall has been riddled with shady deals, reckless ideas and backroom shifting of millions to cover schemes and plug the holes they create.
With this new tax scheme Sam went from demanding it be enacted by council now to insisting it needs 9 months of conversation before a vote.
I couldn't help but laugh at the ignorance of this WW comment-poster. . .
"Jack is an *******. Why doesn't WW do an article on him? He is an elitist, govt bashing pig." (Under Scam Adam's "Rogue of the Week")
Maybe if they sat in on your awesome fed tax class and actually knew half of the story of what the government robs from us, they would appreciate your endless expose's on government irresponsibility and fraud!
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
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
Lello, Douro Tinto 2009
Quinson Fils, Cotes de Provence Rose 2011
Anindor, Pinot Gris 2010
Buenas Ondas, Syrah Rose 2010
Les Fiefs d'Anglars, Malbec 2009
14 Hands, Pinot Gris 2011
Conundrum 2012
Condes de Albarei, Albariño 2011
Columbia Crest, Walter Clore Private Reserve 2007
Penelope Sanchez, Garnacha Syrah 2010
Canoe Ridge, Merlot 2007
Atalaya do Mar, Godello 2010
Vega Montan, Mencia
Benvolio, Pinot Grigio
Nobilo Icon, Pinot Noir, Marlborough 2009
Portuga, Rose 2011
Revelation, Chardonnay, Pays d'Oc 2010
Beaulieu, Cabernet, Rutherford 2005
Monte Alto, Tinto Reserva 2005
Chateau Ste. Michelle, Cabernet, Indian Wells 2009
Espiral, Vinho Rose
Vin-Koru, Pinot Gris 2011
14 Hands, Hot to Trot Red 2009
Rodney Strong, Cabernet, Sonoma 2009
Abacela, Vintner's Blend #11
Portuga, White 2010
La Bourgeoisie, Red 2009
Januik, Red 2009
Three Rivers, River's Red 2008
Kirkland, Alexander Valley Merlot 2008
Muga, Rioja Rose 2010
Quinta das Amoras, Vinho Tinto 2009
Mauro Molino, Barbera d'Alba 2009
Garda Chiaretto Rose
Columbia Crest, Two Vines Vineyard 10 White
Chateau Ste. Michelle, Pinot Gris, Columbia Valley 2009
L'Hortus, Rose de Saignee 2010
Maculan, Pino & Toi 2008
McKinley Springs, Bombing Range Red 2008
Trader Joe's Pinot Gris 2009
Montes Alpha, Cabernet 2007
Gran Sasso, Sangiovese, Terre di Chieti 2009
Garda, Classico Chiaretto Rose
Beaulieu, Cabernet, Rutherford 1999
Picos del Montgo, Tempranillo 2008
Chateau de Montmirail, Vacqueyras 2008
La Granja 360, Syrah 2009
Montgras, Carmenere Reserva 2009
Lange, Pinot Gris 2009
Columbia Crest, Horse Heaven Hills Cabernet 2008
Kirkland, Pinot Grigio 2010
Trader Joe's Coastal Syrah 2009
Columbia Crest, Horse Heaven Hills Merlot 2008
Trader Joe's Coastal Chardonnay 2009
Vieux Papes Red
Domaine de l'Aujardiere, Chardonnay 2009
Santa Rita, Cabernet, Medalla Real 2007
Penfold's, Koonunga Hill Shiraz Cabernet 2008
Guild, Red, Lot #02 2008
Dievole, Dievolino Sangiovese 2008
Laforet, Burgogne Chardonnay 2009
Columbia Winery, Merlot 2007
Bonterra, Cabernet 2008
Elk Cove, Pinot Gris 2009
Maquis Lien 2006
Scott Paul, Pinot Noir, Le Paulee 2007
The Occasional Book
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: 21
At this date last year: 52
Total run 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
Comments (17)
Actuallly, what WW is doing seems vaguely similar to what Ricardson allegedly did.
Odd, that.
Posted by cc | February 6, 2008 4:35 PM
They're very fixated on the whole phone thing. They didn't seem to care much when the city was spending money to robo-call people to attend one of Sam's famous phony "open houses" setting up his transportation tax.
Posted by Jack Bog | February 6, 2008 4:42 PM
Crotchety?
Jack makes a good point about this tax going straight back to consumers. Most business effected on a usage basis would be local distributors (heating oil, beverages, etc) many of whom have exclusive territories, like your local trash collection. So a lot of that tax is going right back to the consumer. You have no choice. It's the independent plumbers, electricians, nurse practitioners, painters, and other small business folk who will have to absorb it, but even that will be temporary.
I wonder if Sam Adams (I believe he has a BA in Poly Sci from UO) would make his transcripts public, because I can't see that this man has the slightest understanding of economics and business, except how to pay back his donors.
Posted by Ted | February 6, 2008 5:52 PM
Jack,
Keep up with the "crotchety-ness" (not sure if that's a word, but I'll go with it). I'd like to think that you and the regular readers and commenters to your blog have helped bring about the vote by holding the Council's feet to the fire on this "fee" scam.
P.S. If Commissioner Adams really was a Poli Sci major at U of O, then surely at some point he learned that even the bluest of blue ribbon committees is no match for an election when it comes to seeking public input.
Posted by John | February 6, 2008 6:27 PM
even the bluest of blue ribbon committees is no match for an election when it comes to seeking public input
Certainly true when the issue can be framed as "if you're not with us you're against us", but that often isn't the case.
Posted by Allan L. | February 6, 2008 7:06 PM
Adam's proposed "transportation fee" is an attempt to charge for street maintenance on the basis of "loading" on the system. Much like you pay a water bill based on water consumption. It is not an unusual fee approach, any longer, as cities across the nation adopt this approach. In 10 years, I bet more than 50% of cities nation wide will have this fee. It may not be right for Portland and maybe you all don't want to maintain your streets using this approach, but why don't you get accurate when you describe the fee approach itself? A vote on this funding approach seems appropriate and inevitable. But I doubt many of the posters here will criticise the legislation with any degree of accuracy or honesty.
Posted by outoftown | February 6, 2008 7:11 PM
If Jack is "crotchety", then maybe we need a "crotchety charrette" for the City Council. I wouldn't even mind an "off-site" in Sweden or France if it would boost attendance.
Plus, they might notice that even the Socialists are giving up on Socialism.
Less Weird, More Crotchety!
Posted by Mister Tee | February 6, 2008 7:40 PM
"But I doubt many of the posters here will criticise the legislation with any degree of accuracy or honesty."
Backgrounder of old stuff on tax versus fee:
(Bicycle, tax or fee) Ellis_v_Frazier_38_Or_462.pdf
(Dog, tax or fee) Hofer_v_Carson_102_Or_545_1922.pdf
(Sheep, tax or fee) Reser_v_UmatillaCounty_48_Or_326_1906.pdf
The load method (whatever phrase you choose) is used to match System Development Charges to, for example, new construction where typical rates of water consumption are calculated for basic categories of units.
Transferring water tax revenue (not fee) to the roads is not sustainable even with a public vote, provided anyone cares to litigate. In my honest opinion, which has no taxable commercial value anyway.
I think that a good remedy for the disposition of water tax collections, collected during litigation, should go to cover outstanding water bonds, or to lower the calculation of system development charges pertaining to water. That is, water fees/taxes (whatever) already have a designated slot in this clowns twisty balloon budget.
Posted by pdxnag | February 6, 2008 9:57 PM
an attempt to charge for street maintenance on the basis of "loading" on the system. Much like you pay a water bill based on water consumption.
Come on, it's nothing of the kind. Only people who live or own a business in Portland will pay this "fee." Anyone else who uses the roads will not. It's more like a property tax than a road toll. A straight-up gas tax would make a lot more sense.
I doubt many of the posters here will criticise the legislation with any degree of accuracy or honesty.
Well then, we're all truly blessed to have you here, aren't we? And if it were up to your hero, Sam the Tram, there would have been no further debate or public vote. How's that in the honesty department?
Posted by Jack Bog | February 6, 2008 9:59 PM
outoftown appears to believe that our city lacks the money to pay to maintain roads. This is not true. We just spend hundreds of millions every year on unnecessary expenses. It's a simple problem: city council has more fun, gets invited to more lunches and gets more ego strokes from spending money on unnecessary "sexy" things than it does spending money on mundane expenses like fixing roads.
Posted by J | February 7, 2008 7:26 AM
I can't figure out why some can't grasp how much money has been and is being misspent.
What does it take for these faithful followers to get it?
Sam the Tram does not tell the truth when he speaks. His carefully chosen words are intended to mislead. He is deliberate and conniving. Especially when it comes to mischaracterized revenue sources and spending.
His tenure at City Hall has been riddled with shady deals, reckless ideas and backroom shifting of millions to cover schemes and plug the holes they create.
With this new tax scheme Sam went from demanding it be enacted by council now to insisting it needs 9 months of conversation before a vote.
What a scoundrel.
Posted by Barbara | February 7, 2008 8:15 AM
So, is the chance of a May vote just out of the question, or could the council still decide to do that later this month?
...with a little prompting from the voters, of course.
Posted by cc | February 7, 2008 9:49 AM
"with a little prompting"?
How about prounding?
Posted by Rick | February 7, 2008 11:21 AM
pounding
Posted by Rick | February 7, 2008 11:22 AM
Jack,
I couldn't help but laugh at the ignorance of this WW comment-poster. . .
"Jack is an *******. Why doesn't WW do an article on him? He is an elitist, govt bashing pig." (Under Scam Adam's "Rogue of the Week")
Maybe if they sat in on your awesome fed tax class and actually knew half of the story of what the government robs from us, they would appreciate your endless expose's on government irresponsibility and fraud!
Keep up the great work!
Posted by KJ | February 7, 2008 11:54 AM
"Jack is an *******. Why doesn't WW do an article on him? He is an elitist, govt bashing pig."
Either Sam or Randy posted that on WW.
Posted by Ben | February 7, 2008 1:25 PM
Ha! Imagine the government types calling anyone an elitist. That's too rich.
Posted by Dave Lister | February 7, 2008 1:52 PM