This just shows the difference between Sam and Randy and most seasoned (that is, skilled) politicians. Deal making like this is a feature, not a bug, of politics. It happens all the time, 365 days a year. Most of the time, though, it is rarely presented in such a ham-fisted, inelegant way.

Most politicians can just present a trial balloon about a particular issue ("I have concerns about the sit-lie ordinance") and trust that folks will get what they're talking about. Sam and Randy, though, have to be clumsy and add "see, the reason I'm saying this is so that they'll support our urban renewal efforts." Duh.

We need to give people jobs and hope.

This is government's responsibility? Giving the homeless jobs?

Actually, there may be an opening the Mayor's office soon...

I'm telling you, in the future, the dividing lines won't be Rep/Dem or Lib/Conserv. The dividing line will be do you net money from the govt or do you give money to the govt.

WHo exactly are these guys representing again?

Interesting article in the Seattle Times by Danny Westneat about government project cost over runs. April 26th was the date it was published and the internet headline is "Tunnel's Cost May Fool Us All."

Outrageous article in the current Tribune, "Adams says city should take over bridges."

He means the 5 bridges over the Willamette currently maintained by Multnomah County. Obviously we have hundreds of millions of dollars I haven't heard about. And the focus is still on downtown and the inner city.

Now is the time for Ted to start making conditions: "I might agree if you drop the MLS soccer/new Beaver stadium/convention hotel/E Burnside development debacles so that you have even a fraction of the money necessary to maintain the bridges and cover basic services."

Our mayor's eyes are obviously bigger than his stomach.