Well, Hughes is more likely to be pro-development than Bob "1,000 Friends of Oregon" Stacey, and development means more jobs for union tradespeople. Pork is bipartisan, and trade unions (as opposed to their public-sector counterparts) are more than happy to ply both sides of the aisle.

Their favoring Smith over Collymore is a bit more perplexing; I thought they'd want to support Collymore to curry favor with her patron, Jeff Cogan, our future Mayor (groan!) . . .

Hughes has "created" something like a million-gazillion jobs and promises to bring more. Not surprised some unions are leaning his way.

Collymore might be one of the worst choices. Little or no experience, little or no expressed desire or specifics about why she wants to serve the public, and spends much of her time trying to ride the coattails of those around her to secure a "job" in local government.

Given that, I'd vote for Loretta Smith any day--despite her support for the new bridge. She's got experience, some guts, and some ideas.

Stacey doesn't get my vote either. Don't be fooled--his "environmental" stance is merely a light-greener verson of Hughes. He's for "smart" growth, for expanding development--basically, doing everything Hughes wants to do, but at a somewhat slower pace and with a few faux-protections in place.

Of course, there are rabid fans of 1000 Friends who will defend him at all costs.

Whats wrong with development as long as it is NOT the kind that destroys existing neighborhoods?

Its going to happen somewhere, so lets have it happen where it won't hurt existing neighborhoods - on currently vacant land!.

Thanks
JK

What is wrong with development is that it ALWAYS destroys existing neighborhoods. That, and the sleazy people who engage in it.

What makes you think there are not existing 'neighborhoods' on what you are calling 'vacant land', anyway?

Which Metro candidate is Bicycle Rex supporting? I'll vote for the other one.

Stacey is a big supporter of "smart" development. That means condo towers subsidized by Urban Renewal.

"Which Metro candidate is Bicycle Rex supporting?"

Obviously Stacey.

And even he isn't left, looney and inept enough for Rex.

This http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/08/opinion/08dowd.html?_r=1&WT.mc_id=OP-SM-E-FB-SM-LIN-LFF-090810-NYT-NA&WT.mc_ev=click
goes to show you there is nothing that the developer weasels won't go after.....

Burkholder has not endorsed anyone. I looked into that, because I was curious which way he would go.

Hughes seems like a great guy and was probably a capable mayor of Hillsboro, but he has no skills that translate to the job of the Metro president. I want him to tell me how he will create one job as Metro president.

If he says he'll do it by expanding the UGB to create short-term construction jobs for more vacant big-box real estate, I will direct him to the vacant commercial lots out Cornelius Pass Rd. and the devastated economic climate of Bend, Oregon.

The purpose of Metro is not to directly create jobs. In fact, nobody's really sure why Metro exists anymore, except as an object lesson in experimental "government".

Meanwhile, it costs a fortune, helps enable development of land (but slower, slower!), and provides cushy jobs for folks like Bragdon and others.

And the current top picture on their website of Hayden Island is priceless. Download it before the land gets developed.