Saltzman socks it to you again -- but with conditions! (Jack Bog's Blog)

Yesterday's Portland City Council proceedings showed several of the city commissioners at their worst. Of course, the Sam Rand Twins sat around all day giving people the finger. But an equally bad performance was turned in by Dan "Legend" Saltzman, who once again is playing the issues both ways.

For example, he admits that there are serious problems with the plan to blow a bazillion dollars on a high-priced "sustainability center" that no business in its right mind would pay unsubsidized rent to occupy. But what does he do -- vote no? Don't be silly -- he votes yes, but with conditions, just as he did with the OHSU aerial tram, the police and firefighter pension debacle, and many other disastrous propositions over the years. He puts a bird on it, and then votes aye:

Saltzman said that while there’s much to be excited about in the Oregon Sustainability Center, several factors make him nervous. To that end, Saltzman introduced two amendments that the councilors unanimously approved. One amendment states that the city will be unwilling to move forward with the project without a guaranteed maximum price for construction costs. The other states that no costs associated with the design or construction of the OSC will come from future urban renewal money.

Wow, what courage.

The same thing happened with the federal immigration jail that's going to be built in the SoWhat District, next door to a grammar school. The City Council is almost certainly going to allow it, because it's already drafting up the meaningless "conditions" that will accompany the commissioners' approval (much to the delight of the Twins' developer pals):

[I]t is clear the Council is leaning toward approval.
But the city's blessing will only come if ICE agrees, in writing, to certain conditions for releasing detainees. Many residents who live near the proposed facility have expressed concerns about detainees released into the neighborhood with no way to leave the area. This summer a city hearings officer rejected the plan, agreeing with the neighbors who complained that releasing some detainees from the facility would pose an unreasonable safety risk....

Elizabeth Godfrey, with ICE, said most detainees that would be released won't be criminals.

"However, the few that are criminal aliens will not be subject to active and/or extraditable warrants and will have served their time and have the right to be in public and walk the streets of Portland," she said.

According to ICE, it will release about three detainees a week from the facility and they will be screened by ICE based on whether they pose a safety threat.

Right now it is not known whether ICE will pledge to Portland council members that it will agree to follow whatever restrictions council members come up with for releasing detainees at the site.

You can almost smell the Legend cologne wafting off the screen from that story. How a guy can make a long political career out of this sort of behavior defies explanation. It must be the megabucks in his trust fund.

Comments (11)

Another mode of operation these "royal five"
play is to simply be absent for certain votes.
Ex: Saltzman disappeared when the vote came up to pour another $80 million into that Powell Butte project, not needed, especially now that the reservoirs may remain as EPA is reconsidering the LT2 and has said that science will prevail. If only we had NY Senator Schumer here and even one of our council members asking for a Waiver, but...
apparently not in the cards unless the public puts enormous pressure on our council to stand up for our public interest here.

Posted by clinamen | September 22, 2011 9:07 AM

I wonder why "the trustifarian legend" bothers, except that the city hall gives him a place to to go everyday.

Posted by portland native | September 22, 2011 9:08 AM

And another 3-2 vote where the two dissenters can pontificate about their concerns- safely knowing their vote is meaningless.

Posted by Ralph Woods | September 22, 2011 9:32 AM

He was on the radio, or in the paper, just a couple of days ago playing the "voice of doubt" role. Yeah right. He is truly just a warm body occupying a seat for awhile.

Fritz and Fish had the brains to vote against it. Hopefully a divided council is all the state needs to put a permanent stake through the heart of this idea.

I will gladly vote for Fritz again. She has her flaws, but she's the only truly independent operator on the council.

Posted by Snards | September 22, 2011 9:32 AM

"How a guy can make a long political career out of this sort of behavior defies explanation."

It's Portland - He's the leper with 4 fingers.

God, has Saltzman ever made a decision on his own? I know he only has grandaddy's money to thank for being born on 3rd base and thinking he's a home run hitter.

"One amendment states that the city will be unwilling to move forward with the project without a guaranteed maximum price for construction costs."

When has that ever stopped them on anything here?

"The other states that no costs associated with the design or construction of the OSC will come from future urban renewal money."

Another throw-away line that'll get lost and forgotten.

We heard all the same crap about PGE Park and PFE.

Posted by Steve | September 22, 2011 9:51 AM

Remember, these people aren't working for the people of Portland. They're just using us to build The City of Tomorrow for the people of tomorrow.

Posted by Mr. Grumpy | September 22, 2011 10:06 AM

There was an Oregonian opinion piece last week pleading for Saltzman to enter the Mayoral race. That would be interesting.

Posted by Frank | September 22, 2011 12:05 PM

Salzman is "smart". The clincher wording in his conditions is: "no costs...will come from future urban renewal money".

Ahhh, define "future"? That can be parsed in so many ways. So, they can take $35 Million now, and in the time before project is legally committed, another large sum could be dedicated before "future" cut-off date is ever defined. Or LID, SCD(Service Development Charges) could be used and possibly interpreted by the outstanding City Attorney's office as not urban renewal money. Or.....

Citizens have caught on. Except for the media. Maybe because the media is part of government now.

Posted by Lee | September 22, 2011 12:33 PM

Media part of government, government part of media. (ex:all the propaganda brochures put out that we pay for to further certain agendas)

Public private partnership?
That is another sound good - like smart growth, -
take a deep look at those words and then the result of what those phrases promote.
How often does public pay and private benefit?

Churning and twisting words, like a merry go around and where it stops, I think we know, not in public's favor.

Posted by clinamen | September 22, 2011 1:02 PM

...They're just using us to build The City of Tomorrow for the people of tomorrow.

That is a good one, Mr. Grumpy.
You have really been coming through with some great insight on the happenings in what once was our City of Roses.

Posted by clinamen | September 22, 2011 1:08 PM

A Conditional Use should not be approved unless the applicant can prove they meet all of the applicable criteria. The Staff Report to the Hearings Officer indicated they criteria were met-recommended approval. The Hearings Officer, a non-elected, non-biased, land use attorney determined the applicant did not meet the criteria--denied. Appealed to Council--that most likely don't even know what the criteria are, they will most probably revers H.O. and approve. It will be interesting to see what how Land Use Board of Appeals decides the case when the neighbors appeal Council decision.

Posted by jimbo | September 23, 2011 4:39 PM

Search this site

About

Clippings

Archives

Links

E-mail, Feeds, 'n' Stuff

Thursday, September 22, 2011

Saltzman socks it to you again -- but with conditions!

Comments (11)

Sponsors

In Vino Veritas

The Occasional Book

Road Work