Good question - Same thing with any public employee union. Maybe the police union has something on Sam (like that'd never happen) or Randy or Danny.

It's not very often that elected officials (unless you count lame-ducks like Ted) ever stand up to the unions. Then again, maybe they saw what happened to MacPherson just because he tried to change PERS a little.

My guess is a little of both...voting power and work stoppage. Its why I think that vital public positions such as police and firefighters should not be allowed to unionize. They know that their positions are powerful, and the politicians will bend over backwards for them.
But then there is the flip-side. When corruption such as we have here becomes apparent, they cannot be touched because of the union.

Don't know for sure, but I would guess some combination of they know where the bodies lie; their quasi-military culture keeps their ranks in line and on-message; there are a lot of sympathetic former union officials in local government around here; they can marshal public sympathy, since many of us were taught as kids to look up to police officers; and they have (like other public employee unions) the patience, motivation, and long-term view to slowly work around anyone or anything that opposes them.

I thought it was illegal for police officers (and other public safety staff) to go on strike. But I suppose they can still drag their feet and not respond with the alacrity we expect of them.

The boys in blue strong-arming city officials is not unique to Portland, though. When I was living in Boston a few years ago and the city and the firefighters union were behind on signing a contract, the firefighters would follow the mayor to all of his public appearances and yell and carry placards trying to embarrass and intimidate him. But Boston has a "strong mayor" form of government and a strong mayor to fill the position; Portland has a "weak mayor", in both senses of the term.

Catching bad guys and putting out fires is hard, dangerous work, and anyone that does it deserves our esteem and a more generous pay and benefits package than your average municipal employee. But when they rebel against the duly elected or appointed representatives of the taxpayers that employ them, they've gone too far. And it's interesting how police officers individually (at least the ones I've met or know in my family) are usually tough-minded, confident, level-headed folks but come across collectively through their union spokespeople as thin-skinned, petulant, and whiny.

From reliable sources, police sources and what is transparent, both Sam and Randy have issues that compromises them. These compromises are one reason that Sam or Randy are not the police commissioner. It is one reason that having a recall vote would be beneficial so that this could be weighed by the voters.

Sam should just resign because having a well run, uncompromising relationship with the police department is one of the most essential factors for a city to function properly.

I've always assumed a lot of it had to do with endorsements once the election season rolls around. They endorse your opponent, and you become "weak on crime." It's interesting to wonder how their influence would wane if Portland was like normal cities and elected its city council by districts, rather than at large.

Here's some more historical perspective from former Goldschmidt aide, Ron Buel, as posted on OregonLive, 11/29/09:

"Is it possible that his [Goldschmidt's] assignment of the Police Bureau to [Charles] Jordan was part of a cover up of his [Goldschmidt's] crime and not a way to distance himself from decisions about the bureau for political reasons? Was the union blackmailing him, as it has a tendency to do?"

I think it is fear of individual and collective retaliation.

I believe it's a collective agreement similar to blackmail. The fictional "Choose Conner" movie says it best.

I would say it has to do with unions sticking together and unions own this state lock, stock and barrel. Think I heard that PERs has roughly 400k active employees and another 300k retired. What politician wants to take that on? Those kind of numbers are a very large portion of the voting block for the state.

It's a combination of all the things mentioned by others but also the fact that the union has a history of very assertive and vocal leadership that has always been fully willing to publicly go toe-to-toe with any politician they needed to on behalf of their members, and it has just about always the politician who has come away from these clashes with the bloody nose.

Actually, Saltzman would have looked great if he had fired someone along this long and winding road. His brain is just too fossilized to recognize it.

He could have made a great speech when the police no-confidence vote came out.
Started it with the following line:

"The power of the police union has been used in a way that shows, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that it is no longer working in the public interest."

I think these theories give a false impression. They imply that Sam and company are in office to stand up for ordinary citizens. I don't see where you get that.
Ask yourselves what Sam or the other politicians would gain from representing the citizens of Portland, or being our protectors against abuses of power?
What do they have to gain from acting out of a sense of right and wrong?
This has nothing to do with their ambitions in office. It's easier and more pleasant for them to skip over the tiresome leadership stuff and focus on what they are mainly there for: To make business deals with rich people.
If that bullet the police fired the other week, had gone through some condo plans, or the finance deal for PGE Park, then you might see Sam and Randy become outraged and do something.
Until then, we're pretty much on our own.

"a police union that negotiates to exempt policemen from annual performance reviews is working against the public interest...."

"....a police union that shields individual members against any and all blame in the cases of lethal abuse of citizens, is working against the public interest...."

On and on. Oh Portland, how did we get these ants for people on the city council? And HOW can we get rid of them?

Where's a Dorothy McCullough Lee when you need her?

"Think I heard that PERs has roughly 400k active employees and another 300k retired."

I am sure Mr Fearless47 will correct me, but I think there is a total of about 320K activer PERS accounts. However, remember that each account probably has a spouse and friends who vote also.

My best friend who lives in DC visited recently. In a random conversation, he posited the following question: "If unions exist to provide protection for workers against corporations with an interest in keeping their wages down and working them overtime and whatnot, then why are there ANY public employee unions?"

I hadn't thought of it that way before. Why are there fireman unions? Or teachers unions? They need protection from the oppressing hand of government management? Really?

Could it be that police officers have guns - and power - and can readily find the license plate number and home address of anyone that offends them?

It is well know in LE circles that following (and videotaping) any car, you will find a violation after a few blocks. With so many nanny state laws and PC expectations a close look at anyone will bring up something sooner or later. Now with A Mayor with know sexual aberrations,and difficulty driving, it is a no brainer not to piss them off. Then to have union people on the council- its not the union part but the fact of working together for many years- co (union)workers will know all your shortcoming and human natures.

Portland is screwed.

Every official on the City Council owes his or her position to union support. Public financing of campaigns does not change this because union support is still necessary for a successful campaign. Because of this, union interests dominate the politics in this city, regardless which union is involved.

Look at every major political decision that is made here and ask yourself if it can be explained fully by anything other than that.

In 35 years working in labor relations for the federal Govt, I have never seen a Union with this amount of sway with the exception of the Longshoremen, who truly have power. I strongly suspect they know where the bones are buried, including the ones Michael Schrunk's Father left along with the other Gansters who ran this city. Honestly, Goldschmidt's crew have not committed murder that I am aware of but they do hold the same kind of power and no doubt, a lot of bones are buried there, which the police are aware of. Think Hoover and how he held power on a National scale

You pose a great question. Here are my thoughts:

What's wrong with a union having power? Isn't that the point of collectively organizing?

Just because the police have others' lives in their hands, does that preclude their right to organize?

Also, is there something wrong with favoring the police/fire union over other unions? I don't think so. Neither would a spouse of an officer/firefighter.

Finally, doesn't it make sense to consider the opinions of the actual employees who are conducting a service to the public? Especially when those employees are part of the largest bureau in the City?

Having defended the police union, I certainly think a lot of their union positions are backwards and deserve to be challenged by PPB commanders, Internal Affairs, elected officials, the Independent Police Review Board, Portland Copwatch, etc. I also believe that given their inherent power, they should be held to a higher standard and oversight than other union employees. That means constantly revising with public input and enforcing their 651 pages of policies and procedures: http://www.portlandonline.com/police/index.cfm?c=29867&a=32482 .

Someone mentioned above, but cops and firefighters cannot strike. If unable to agree on a contract, the talks go to binding arbitration. Portland lost the last arbitration (in 2006?) to the Police union, and it cost millions since the arbitrator has to go with either the City's or the union's last best offer. There is no middle ground in this type of binding arbitration.

Public safety unions have traditionally held a lot of power because they've been able to sway public opinion. Even in Portland, it used to be the kiss of death if the cops or firefighters publicly opposed you as a candidate. I think that's still true of firefighters -- we all love them -- but no longer true of cops. However, I'm not sure the cops or City Council has quite realized that yet.

Personally, I think the Campbell shooting not only killed an innocent man, it also killed Police's chances at a wage increase in the current labor negotiations. With the current public outrage, how does Council give them the 5-7% wage hike they're probably going to ask for?

"It's interesting to wonder how their influence would wane if Portland was like normal cities and elected its city council by districts, rather than at large."

It wouldn't wane a bit -- elect from districts and you'd just give the PPB more endorsement opportunities in more restricted entry races.

At least with at large elections, people disgusted with the PPB can unite across the city to elect a pro-sanity candidate, should any appear. With districts, you have even greater incumbency power and less opportunity for insurgents.

b, do you think the "Goldschmidt's crew" had anything to do with the Prison Superintendent Franke killing in Salem? Sure seems like a coverup for drug dealing by government officials-like the crew.