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 December 8, 2011 7:41 AM. The previous post in this blog was In Japan, an unspeakable debate. The next post in this blog is East side streetcar goes Wapato. 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

Thursday, December 8, 2011

Breaking news: Reality bites.

Willy Week goes on and on this week about the scarcity of apartments in Portland. The reporter's got lots of statistics and anecdotes, but there's something about the story that's less than convincing. It comes off sounding like whining from some of the many young, "creative," and foolish people who have moved to Portland with no money or legitimate job prospects and are now discovering that, golly, you can't get a nice place to rent in the middle of town for $500 a month:

In September, Zac Thayer, a 20-year-old punk-rock musician, started trolling Craigslist for a house or an apartment to share that would cost him no more than $500 a month. It took two months, including weeks spent sleeping on friends’ couches.

That is supposed to prove what, exactly? That Zac doesn't want to live in Parkrose or Oregon City? Our heart bleeds for him, but it is no surprise he'll have to have more than $500 a month to live where all the area's hippest stuff is.

"We got really frustrated," Bozanich says. "We’d draw out a map of different neighborhoods and just start bickering about just having to live farther out, and I would be like, 'I don’t want to spend money to live in a place I don’t really like.'"

Such as the real world, apparently.

The WW treatment is understandable. Without the 21-to-35-year-old set -- the people who regularly go to bars to hear local bands -- that paper would probably go under. And so of course, the journalists there are inclined, perhaps subconsciously, to portray that demographic group as victims.

But there's more going on here than that. The WW assessment of the situation seems suspiciously like another thinly veiled sermonette about the gajillion people who are moving here any minute now, and how we'd better wreck all the close-in neighborhoods with high-rise apartment bunkers to accommodate the future unemployed and baristas who will soon be arriving.

Folks, the population of the City of Portland increased by only about 2,100 people last year. During that time, there were hundreds of apartments added to the city's supply. Many owner-occupied houses were converted to rentals. Things are roughly in balance, if somewhat on the tight side.

Yes, it's gotten much more expensive to rent inside the city limits of Portland. And why's that? Nowhere mentioned in the story is the fact that landlords' expenses have shot up drastically over the last few years -- especially water and sewer bills and property taxes. Those get passed on to renters, which is why the $500 crash pad, or even the $800 apartment, ain't coming back. Nobody's going to build or operate cheap, or even middle-class, apartments in town without a massive government subsidy. And don't think that's not part of the sermonette -- that we need to give Winkler and Edlen and Homer and the rest of the Usual Suspects more public money. For "workforce housing." In a city that has no place for the "force" to work.

City commissioner Nick Fish certainly seems to be completely on board with the program:

"If we care about people having choices about where they live, if we don’t want to concentrate poverty on the edges of our city, then we need a range of housing choices in each neighborhood," says City Commissioner Nick Fish, who oversees the Housing Bureau. "We’re limiting people’s choices about where they can live and raise a family."

He makes it sound like a freedom march, with Dike Dame in the role of Martin Luther King. Hey, Nick, we'd like to raise our family in Dunthorpe, but funny thing, it's out of our price range. That's the way it works in most of the world -- you live where you can afford to live, and the rich folks don't let the poor folks get too close. But apparently, in the "spirit of equity" -- the new content-free sales pitch that goes hand-in-hand with "sustainable" -- we've got to achieve the impossible by mowing down some decent old buildings and slapping up some more particle board apartment bunkers. Oh, and having the city's taxpayers pay for it:

According to the Housing Bureau, the city since 2006 has paid $150 million to help add 4,500 units of affordable housing through construction and aid to renters making down payments when they buy a home.

Fish says the subsidized units go to households that make 60 percent or less of Portland’s median family income. That means a family of four that makes less than $43,200 would qualify. A single person needs to make less than $30,240.

And where does the subsidy money wind up? Buying nice new BMWs for our own little 1%. Who then toss some money into the campaign coffers of politicians like, well, Fish.

In any event, the facts that vacancies are down and rents are up are certainly noteworthy, but they're hardly as horrible a thing as the WW story suggests. As we found out back when we had only $500 a month for housing, you can't always get what you want. Some people have to live in Gladstone or the 'Couv.

Comments (43)

Whine whine whine! We want it all and we want it now! And we want someone else to pay our expenses for a life style we cannot afford to maintain.
Lots of us have lived in places we disliked for lack of money. Many people are doing so right now.
The Willy Week kids need to grow up.

I know of two families, both capable of buying houses, that are renting by choice at the moment, simply because they perceive that housing prices still have some decline left in them in the near future. It isn't a matter of affordability; it's strictly improving their investment upside potential.

Obviously this is anecdotal, but it illustrates another dimension to the renter statistics cited that isn't often covered by the media: there is a renter population segment that will disappear quickly once things hit bottom and stabilize.

Nowhere mentioned in the story is the fact that landlords' expenses have shot up drastically over the last few years -- especially water and sewer bills and property taxes.

Property taxes probably not so much. There is a 3% statutory cap on growth in base property taxes -- about the average of long-term inflation over the last 10 years. The other additions would be levies: there is currently a children's levy, a library levy, and a schools operating levy. Did I miss one? The children's levy was new in 2004(?), and the others have been around in one form or another for awhile.

I think this is a straight supply/demand issue. Demand for rentals is higher, thus rents are higher too. Housing supply is relatively inelastic, but higher rents will cause some people to rent out homes or spare bedrooms, so supply will increase somewhat. And your overall point about neighborhood desirability is right on.

The absurd thing, of course, is that the reason the "hip" neighborhoods are hip now is because people started moving there because the rents were cheap. That's how areas become hip! Was Alberta or Hawthorne hip 20 years ago? No! So hip kids/artists moved there, and then businesses followed them, and then restaurants, and now those places are hip. The best way to improve outlying areas is to encourage people to move there for cheap rent, not to build up already established areas. Gah.

Headwaters Apartments: Portland-owned property exempt from taxes but open to residents making $97,200

It's the increased costs to a property owner.
Water and garbage have both gone up 50% or more in the past two years.

Add that on to energy costs.

Words can be used to deceive. Katz would often say we need more affordable housing and in the face of things that may have sounded reasonable, if in fact, she had kept saying we need more subsidized public housing, more subsidized public housing and we had heard that term over and over again, things might not have progressed in that public housing scene.

It is almost as though the drive is to get as many people into subsidized housing as possible. This can be done in several ways, such as high taxes, water rates, paying for the ubiquitous pet projects, bonds that in-debt our community, that many people can no longer afford to live in their single family homes, or live here period and will have to leave the area OR be a ready made market to live in more public housing, OR keep "promoting/inviting" new ones in for this market. This is only lucrative for some. Puts many more people living in these places under scrutiny as well. Sounds a bit Orwellian but what are we to think? The downward spiral of a debt laden community will not help the people to stay in their homes.

My view is that we HAD real affordable housing, housing that was affordable which is very different than "subsidized affordable" housing. Small duplexes, bungalows and the real affordable apartments have been razed to make room for what I perceive to be this housing agenda they have in mind for many. I believe that if they could, they would come into neighborhoods, raze them down as the land underneath some of the homes in the "mantra of smart growth" is too valuable to be occupied with a single family home.

The UGB creation of land scarcity within is not helping.

Create blight in some areas or merely call it that, then go in and take the land.

On a parallel path, run propaganda to approve of the agenda.

As I said before, my concept of what is going on here may sound jaded, but I do not think that my eyes and watch-dogging deceive me here.

There were also a couple of recent changes, thanks to the wisdom of the Oregon Legislature, that probably end up costing tenants: 1) landlords can no longer charge for such things as cleaning fees--so now landlords have an incentive to recoup tenant turnover costs through higher rents--likely costing most tenants more than the fees they would have paid when such fees were disclosed; and 2) tenants now get 60 days' notice before a rent increase (while tenants still only have to give 30 days' notice to vacate)--so landlords have an incentive to be more aggressive about pricing at the outset. Whoever was behind those legal changes needs a course in how businesses actually run.

Observer's points are well taken, with some gloss. A month to month tenant who has lived in the premises more than 1 year is now entitled to 60, rather than 30 days no-cause notice before termination. Thus, to impose a rent increase on a month to month tenant, a landlord would have to give not less than 60 days notice to only those tenants who have lived in the premises more than 1 year that they either need to accept the rent increase or vacate the premises. This change and the abolition of most fees is the doing of the tenant lobby [primarily Legal Aid and John Van Landingham], which has systematically imposed its economically ignorant left-wing views into the Residential Landlord Tenant Act since 1973. How many fewer homeless would we have if landlords were not mandated to maintain "habitable" housing? The cost of doing such is passed through, like all costs, to tenants and many sleep under bridges rather than in "slums" because they can't afford the cost of "habitable" housing. Think what rents would be if all rentals were mandated to have air conditioning, a swimming pool and a hot tub! "Habitable" housing is only a difference of degree, not kind.

The more things change. This was the same kvetching that was going on fifteen years ago when I lived in Southwest. Back then, there was a shortage of affordable apartments in Portland proper, due to the beginnings of the dotcom boom. I wish someone would explain to the hipsters that rental prices will go as high as the market can bear, and rental prices are as insane in downtown Portland as they are in Brooklyn right now. Namely, the huge influx of new renters may be nonexistent, but the ones who are moving in are doing so with Mommy and Daddy's money. Cut off the regular plunderings of Dad's 401(k) for rent, art supplies, and thrice-daily trips to Stumptown 'to be seen", and you'd see downtown rental prices drop like a rock.


“It’s absolutely true we won’t be able to build our way out of our housing crisis,” says Mary Li, Multnomah County community services director.

Followed by:

Bozanich hopes the city and developers figure it out.

“I know that community is really important to Portland,” she says. “I hope we get to keep living that way instead of being pushed out and separated.”

Makes me lmfao.

The housing market is so screwed up from decades of manipulation - everything from manipulated interest rates and monetary policy to central planning style subsidies/penalties to private fraud/theft to "public/private partnerships" that are little more than fronts for graft to a manipulated construction labor market - and more! - that it won't be "figured out" any time soon.

Acutally it's easy to figure out at a personal level: if there's no place you can afford where you are, move to where you can afford it.

Systemically? Fugetaboutit...

"the facts that vacancies are down and rents are up are certainly noteworthy, but they're hardly as horrible a thing as the WW story suggests."

There are plenty of spaces in Milwaukie or Gresham. In addition, if CoP didn't want SDCs of about $15K/apt, we might build a few more.

Is there a law that prevents "progressives" from learning about economics, or are they just incapable of understanding the topic? I've been wondering that for awhile now.

It does appear that a person needs to be completely ignorant of basic economics in order to work at City Hall.

This just in, having unrealistic expectations may lead to disappointment.

It was nice of the WW to throw some numbers in there in an attempt to give this 29-year-old woman's story some legitimacy. However, it really seemed like just another "me"lennial complaining about not getting exactly what they wanted right when they wanted it.

"Bozanich hopes the city and developers figure it out."

Obviously city government has failed since this woman couldn't find her dream rental in her dream neighborhood at rock bottom prices. Guess we should subsidize more condos, which typically can't be occupied by more than 15-20% renters and still get financing, that ought to solve all her problems.

In 1980, I rented a 1-bedroom apartment on NW Couch (right behind the Burnside McDonald's) for $350. Around 1983, they raised the rent to $380, so I moved to NW Marshall, where I rented a beautiful 1 BR condo (ceramic tile floors, walnut wainscoting) for $385. Washer & dryer right off the kitchen.

I bought a house in SW in '86 - then they brought in the infill. Before long, cars were whizzing past every few seconds on the formerly quiet street. Good times, bad times.

As a twenty-something with many friends, I am astonished by some of the insane expectations I hear. And Jack isn't out of touch by pointing out the leaders of this idio'city', that's why the population isn't growing, all my co-workers with children live outside of city, and why I won't be buying a house here either.

Dave J makes the perfect point above. That said, most of those hip people will move to a different city, rather than a suburb of a city. And we can complain all we want that we're doing too much to lure those hipsters, but many hipsters are actually employed, employers, entrepreneurs, and community activists that made neighborhoods come alive. Only some are losers, so we need to find a good balance between attracting and resisting. We need to make sure attracting isn't coddling/subsidizing, and we need to make sure that resisting doesn't become flaming, antagonizing, and stereotyping.

When will these blue hair tatted out losers understand you can't be a barista and live in a million dollar condo on the river? Until they realize they must assimilate with the rest of us who are supporting their derrieres they will continue to be relegated to shacking up for months on end on someone's couch. Let me know how that pays. Losers.

The other additions would be levies: there is currently a children's levy, a library levy, and a schools operating levy. Did I miss one?

What about Admiral Randy's "pay extra property tax for my fireboats" levy?

Rental house in city limits $22.28 per K.
Rental house in suburbs(east $16.05 per K.

Jack's points are well taken. We've lived in some really horrible places until we got back on our feet. Housing has always been expensive here.

But this?

How many fewer homeless would we have if landlords were not mandated to maintain "habitable" housing?

Yeah, darn that Legal Aid for "systematically imposed its economically ignorant left-wing views" on those poor slumlords!

Gee, if only we let slumlords do as they please, everyone would have a place to sleep. It might burn down or rain on you in the living room, maybe electrocute your child, or lack running water, but golly it's a home.

Take a gander at what is considered "habitable" rental housing in Oregon:

Briefly: A rental unit must be waterproof and weatherproof, have running potable water and be hooked up to a sewage system. It must have adequate heat and electrical, working appliances, and generally be clean and safe. How very unreasonable.

Yes, just imagine what rentals would cost if we mandated hot tubs and swimming pools! Because that's just the natural extension of expecting homes to have a safe water supply. Puhleeze. And just imagine what they would cost if we mandated a golden unicorn for each tenant too. The argument makes about as much sense.

Earlier this week a commenter was advocating for orphanages for the nation's poor children. Now we have someone actually saying rentals cost too much because we insist they be habitable. What next... are there no prisons, are there no poorhouses?

Every time I hear the phrase"affordable housing", I translate that to mean subsidized housing, or government built housing. Government is the worst possible entity to be getting into the real estate development business. Since gov. Doesn't have to turn a profit, they deal with visions paid with funny money all day long.

Hillsdale Terrace, a HAP housing project in Hillsdale, is scheduled to be torn down and replaced with new construction for the tidy sum of about $400K per unit. That includes social services for current residents and admin. costs, but for that price, the low income folks really could be living in a nice condo with a view of the river. Even at half the price, with money left over for HOA fees.

The Headwaters Apartments in Multnomah cost about $147k each to build. That would buy a condo in a vintage building in NW Portland. Pretty nice for workforce housing.

So I wonder about the term "economic equity" and the like. Does this mean that the real workforce who make just enough to scrape by and live in perfectly nice apartments that have a shared laundry room and perhaps an unheated pool and way too many dogs are now considered too well off to be subsidized? Does it mean that we have to keep subsidizing everyone until we ALL get to live in the home of their dreams? How sustainable is any of this, and why should government be building housing in the first place? (I do approve of section 8 vouchers that get low income people into private housing, but there is a multiple-year waiting list in every county for a voucher.).

For $56 - $70K per unit, older apartment apartments are being bought and sold right now to investors who intend to operate them for a profit. But no government agency can ever figure out how to get this done. Why should they? It isn't their job, and when they do it they do it badly.

"a 20-yr old punk rock musician..."

Now that must pay well. There is probably around 1000 bands in town all competing for a $50 gig- if they can get that.

It was nice of the WW to throw some numbers in there in an attempt to give this 29-year-old woman's story some legitimacy. However, it really seemed like just another "me"lennial complaining about not getting exactly what they wanted right when they wanted it.

Sounded like that to me, too.

Bozanich, the woman who found fingernails in her new apartment’s bed, needed to live close to the city center. She’d been living with her parents in North Plains, but she was undergoing chemotherapy for breast cancer and wanted to be nearer to her clinic in North Portland. 

Darn whiny breast cancer woman.

If her clinic was in the Peal District, would she get the right to an apartment there too? Breast cancer sucks, but a doesn't have anything to do with this story.

Nolo:The Headwaters Apartments in Multnomah cost about $147k each to build. That would buy a condo in a vintage building in NW Portland. Pretty nice for workforce housing.

To live there, you can't earn more than $97,200/yr.

To government types, that's poverty.

Could the WW article be a response to the Headwaters controversy? "Hey Willamette Week, there really is a housing shortage, so tell people about it and maybe they'll understand that city subsidies to rental housing is a good thing."

Manipulation of the housing market?
My hands began typing way too quickly and out came Nip –
was this a slip of the hand or mind?
nip does however fit within manipulation!

Message may be -
nip this in the bud before it gets out of hand.


Please run for Mayor.

I gave up on Fish and regret thinking he was any different: I'm moving to Salmon Creek (North Vancouver).

I can't vote for you, but I'll donate $1,000 and 50 hours of door knocking. Just so Portland doesn't become Detroit.

...then we need a range of housing choices in each neighborhood," says City Commissioner Nick Fish, who oversees the Housing Bureau.>>>

Does Fish mean particle board ghetto housing should be a range of housing choice in EACH neighborhood?
...or is that "choice" only for some neighborhoods?

Mr. Tee, I'll see your 1K and raise you 1K, plus 30 hrs a week for "the duration" of the campaign. (And I live in Clackamas County...)

I'll kick in a thousand as well and promise to exert influence on all who will listen. If only we could be so fortunate.

I come to offer a slightly different view.

Due to a pending divorce, I recently had to engage in apartment-hunting for the first time in YEARS.

Here's my beef: The market is so saturated here that no matter how quickly I managed to respond to a craigslist ad, there were three or four people who beat me to it.

So it's not the cost hike that bugs me -- it's the impenetrable market. And I'm not talking about "hip" parts of town -- I'm talking about places in Hazelwood, a.k.a. Meth Land and Home-Invasion Land.

WORSE than the completely impenetrable market is that some landlords don't play fair. Instead of giving preference to the first applicant, many landlords want to choose from a pool of applicants to find the renter who is "just right for them."

In my difficult experience finding a place, I encountered such landlords, and often what constitutes a "good fit" is an effete, buzzword-spouting, green propagandist. Quiet, neutral-appearing rubes like me? Forget it. I just don't look like an ace composter.

So I guess what I'm saying is -- even the Willamette Week wrote the article with a creative class sob-story angle -- they are nevertheless correct that the entire process of finding an apartment in this town is a SERIOUS EFFING PAIN IN THE AS$.

Well said. As always.

Thanks, JB!

I cried because I couldn't find $500 digs in the Pearl or Nob Hill. Then I met a man who couldn't find space under a Portland bridge....

If her clinic was in the Peal District, would she get the right to an apartment there too? Breast cancer sucks, but a doesn't have anything to do with this story.

I thought I was responding to the comment about how she was just another "'me'lennial" not getting what they want, Jack, but if you want to throw out specious arguments about the siting of breast cancer clinics in the Pearl, go ahead.

To "ex-bartender": So, you'd rather have folks living on the streets, homeless, than live in a house with "vermin", a window that doesn't latch, or a porch with a rotten board? I was one of the legal aid lawyers involved in drafting the original Residential Landlord Tenant Act and testified before the 1973 legislative committee considering it, telling horror stories like those you recounted. I, and my fellow legal aid lawyers,in our idealism, and economic isgnorance, had no clue what we were about to "achieve". During my stint at legal aid, I had virtually no homeless only became a problem when the "low end" of the housing market was lopped off by the Act. If you let the perfect be the enemy of the good, you'll get "better" housing, but less of it, because the cost of maintaining "habitability", and fighting off tenant's lawyers who are quick to exploit any "non-habitable" premises, raises the bar for "affordable housing". Do we read of many "homeless" in NYC at the turn of the 20th century? No, because they were crammed into "slums"...but at least they had a roof over their heads. Better a leaky roof than no roof at all...and if you think you can have "habitable" housing for all in a market economy...the last 38 years have proved you wrong...unless the taxpayers subsidize "low-income" housing for all our current homeless, you are supporting a system which forces people to be homeless, when, as before 1973, virtually all of them would rather live in "non-habitable" housing than no housing at all.

Well that's a new one, Ms. Moos. I must admit I hadn't heard the claim before now that it was the Residential Landlord Tenant Act that lead to homelessness in Oregon, as presumably similar laws did so across the country. Do you have any actual data to back that up, or are we to rely solely on your anecdotal tale? I was under the impression that homelessness was a  much more complex issue than that. 

So by that logic, if we simply do away with all consumer protections, a good many of society's problems would just go away? Sure, starving people will eat poisoned food. They will probably die, but at least they didn't starve to death. And by golly, someone got to make a buck off of it, so it's a win-win situation! We can now cross world hunger off the list of society's great problems. Wow. The cynicism is palpable.

If you were indeed an attorney for Legal Aid, you know full well the utter BS behind your claim that "the cost of... fighting off tenant's lawyers who are quick to exploit any "non-habitable" premises" is an issue, let alone a barrier to affordable housing. 

A cursory reading of the Act shows plainly that the remedies for violating it are so small that the cost of hiring a lawyer would far exceed any award. Not that the majority of those who would need to bring such an action would have the resources to hire a lawyer anyway. And you must know that Legal Aid has never had the resources to chase after landlords for "a window that doesn't latch, or a porch with a rotten board." I know this from first-hand experience. If you were involved with Legal Aid, you do too.

I am simply amazed that people keep pining away for the good 'ol days where we warehoused the poor and other "undesirables" in orphanages, asylums, workhouses and slums. How far we've come. 

Do we read of many "homeless" in NYC at the turn of the 20th century?

Just because you're ignorant of something doesn't mean they weren't there.

In 1872, James B. McCabe, Jr., wrote:
There are 10,000 children living on the streets of New York....The newsboys constitute an important division of this army of homeless children. You see them everywhere.... They rend the air and deafen you with their shrill cries. They surround you on the sidewalk and almost force you to buy their papers. They are ragged and dirty. Some have no coats, no shoes and no hat.

Yet isn't the affordable housing issue part of the argument on behalf of transportation projects like light rail? It makes it possible to get an apartment in Park Rose and easily commute downtown, or wherever. So now it's about expanding supply closer in... Or creating more density. Which will eventually make people who can afford to live close in actually want to escape the inner city, thus creating more blight and greater need for... More urban renewal! Brilliant! We underestimate these people.

And poor Zac Thayer (obviously no relation to Tommy Thayer, Portland guitarist now in KISS) should go to a true punk scene like New York or London and see what that $500/month he and his friend has to spend will get him.

Affordable housing or what much of what is called affordable housing is public housing, subsidized housing?

In my view, we had real affordable housing in our city, such as small bungalows, duplexes, affordable apartments. Those are being incrementally replaced by the UGB creating scarcity of land and the mantra of smart growth. These policies have not helped to save our real affordable housing and are perpetuating high density, much of what is public housing now instead of the real affordable housing we had.

Yes, quite the plan they seem to have in store for us.

The dude in the article wants a $500 apartment *share* -- meaning, a situation where three roommates, for instance, pay $1500 together for a house or apartment. That isn't very far-fetched at all for inner Portland, which demonstrates how affordable the place still is relative to other cities.


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