Mayor Tom Potter was a guest on Nick Fish’s Outlook Portland this past weekend. I finally watched it last night (yay TiVo!).

Fish opened up by outlining his questions: He planned to ask about Potter’s record and what he’s accomplished over the past two years, his style of leadership, and charter review.

On the first—Potter’s record—ol’ Mr. Mayor, as usual, didn’t have much concrete to offer.

He said “it’s hard to think of just two or three” accomplishments, and said he’s worked hard to “reconnect people with their government,” and “make government more user friendly.” The closest he got to naming specifics was mentioning “charter review and the visioning process”—two projects that are no where near accomplished.

“The city has lacked a comprehensive vision for its future,” Potter explained, making the case for VisionPDX. He wants to find out “what our expectations are of each other and of our future.”

I actually liked what Potter had to say next about his style of leadership—Fish pointed out that Potter’s spent a lot more time working on relationships than he has, say, constructing buildings or monuments.

“Cities are about people. I believe the reason that building is there in the first place is to serve the needs of the people. That’s the same about bridges, about monuments,” he said. His job is “95 percent about relationships and building good relationships. The media doesn’t get that. They want to see something that’s tangible, that they can quantify. When in fact, the business of government is about people.”

Good point. That’s what I’m getting at when I argue for a “bigger and better” kind of Portland—what it really comes down to is wanting more people here, people who do the sorts of things that make Portland great (art, music, keeping it weird, etc).

Charter review and more, after the cut…

Potter also spent considerable time stumping for the charter review recommendations. Fish joked that he thinks of our current commissioner system as "the five mayor system," he said. "Looking forward two years, what would be different for Portlanders if we changed the form of government?" Potter did a decent job explaining why he thinks the strong mayor system would be good for Portland.

"First, I think Portlanders have to understand clearly what the commissioner form is. The commission form invests all three branches of government in each of the five elected council members. The only different authority the mayor has is to assign the bureaus of the city.

I think that the question for most people is why would you want to change something that works so well. I would never say that our system is broke, because we've done a lot of good things. But if you were to ask me could you make it better? Yes. I think that the commission form of government is like an ill fitting suit. You can wear it and it does what it's supposed to do. But it doesn't really meet the needs. And I think in the 21st century in Portland you need a stronger form of government.

The recommendation coming from the charter review commission is clearly to have a mayor that has some addition powers and also clarify the difference between the council's functions and the mayor's function.

The executive function currently is dispersed among five people. I believe that that leads to silos. You have to work hard to undo those silos. Even in the 30 years I spent in policing, the question I always had, is Portland as good as it is because of this form of government or in spite of it? After two years in government I can say it's in spite of it."

Potter also shot down the argument that the new system would install an "imperial mayor."

"It's a bogus argument," he said, concurring with Fish and adding that if that were the case, then the city currently has five imperial mayors. Potter pushed for the CAO portion of the charter review proposal, saying it "provides a professional manager to manage the bureaus," which is good for the bureaus, who have to endure new priorities and new systemic changes every time a bureau is handed to a new commissioner. That's "hard on bureaus, and hard on moral."

Other highlights from the half hour show that I inexplicably decided to partially transcribe: Fish asked about "the Foxworth situation," and Potter said "race was not a factor." in demoting the chief.

Fish asked the mayor to review his own performance: "If you were to put a grade down for the first two years, what would you say?"

"I'd say a B." Potter said. Unfortunately, Fish didn't ask why.