« Faceball | Main | Chalk a Block »
In a city where “public involvement” is the mantra of city government, it’s the ordinances that pass with none of it that deserve most scrutiny. So it’s ironic to be sitting in city hall this morning listening to council discussing lobbying rules, with council about to vote without so much as a whisper on a ten year extension of the contract between itself and the downtown business community (represented by the Portland Business Alliance) to pay the salaries of three cops.
Lobbying is one thing, but if you really want influence down at city hall, it seems buying three police officers is a subtler way to go about it. And nobody asks you to declare your economic interest (as if it weren’t obvious) or scrutinizes your involvement in the shaping of public safety policy too closely. To hammer the point home: The Portland Business Alliance (PBA) is led by a former Oregonian reporter, Sandra McDonough, who wants downtown to be a place where suburban shoppers can feel comfortable spending their money. It has lobbied consistently to make it illegal for homeless people to sit on the city’s sidewalks, and pays $1.5m per year for private rent-a-cops to patrol Old Town and downtown’s parks—dressed like cops, many of whom carry guns, and with no public oversight. Do a search on this site for “PPI” or “Portland Business Alliance” if you like.
Central Precinct Commander Mike Reese is here, sitting next to Mark Warrington, the public safety manager of the Parks Bureau, Mike Kuykendall of the Portland Business Alliance, and Bill Sinnott, director of the PBA contracted Clean & Safe program. Dan Handelman of Portland Copwatch is signed up to testify, and Street Roots wrote to the mayor and all the city commissioners yesterday to question the wisdom of the BAKSHEESH contract extension.
11:20am, here we go:
Central Precinct Commander Mike Reese just made a one minute statement, then Dan Handelman said this: “What we have is in this case extending a contract for ten years to provide police officers essentially to a private entity, the Portland Business Alliance. I understand the value of public/private partnerships, but there’s a thing called tax money. And most people, when they pay tax money, who get the same services as everybody else.”
“In this case what we have is a private entity paying the salaries of police officers to do something that, I assume, is pleasing them, otherwise they wouldn’t continue to pay. I think this would be better to a have a serious discussion with the community about what this means. If we raise enough money, can we buy our own police officers, too?”
COUNCIL: Randy Leonard questions Central Precinct Commander, Mike Reese (right.) PBA lobbyist Bernie Bottomly (left), and Copwatch activist Dan Handelman (middle) listen to the discussion.
Randy Leonard said: “This money pays for police officers to a private entity. But it’s my understanding that they augment the officers assigned to central precinct. But that the individual officers who work downtown don’t even know that their salaries are being paid by the Portland Business Alliance.”
He got his information from the PBA’s lobbyist, Bernie Bottomly. It’s wrong.
Commander Reese: “The officers that are assigned to work with PPI under this contract work directly for me. They’re accountable to the citizens of downtown Portland. We do liasons with Clean & Safe, and the officers who are riding bicycles carry Clean & Safe radios as well as ours. We have 3 officers that are dedicated to that detail. It can rotate but generally we like to keep the same three officers because they know the business owners.”
Leonard: “Do these officers narrow what they would do because their salaries are being paid by the PBA?”
Reese: “…they do.”
Leonard: “You see what the issue is here. There is some sense that they’re just doing the work of the PBA.”
Leonard basically accused the PBA’s Bottomly of misleading him, but of course, after a bit of back and forth, the contract extension passed. But then, you’d expect it to. Neither Kuykendall nor Sinnott from the PBA/Clean&Safe were required to even speak.
I’m glad the discussion was at least raised. The mayor pointed out that the Police Bureau also contracts with the Housing Authority of Portland and the Lloyd District to pay for cops. But should anybody be paying the salaries of our police? Other than the city, I mean.
Dan Handelman says: “The public should be paying for the police, and everybody should receive equal service. The implication that the PBA is not getting any better service than anybody else is ridiculous. If a downtown homeowner calls non-emergency and says ‘there’s a drunk guy on my lawn’, they’re going to have to wait until the end of a long list of calls to get any service. But if a downtown business owner calls Clean & Safe, then boom. One of these three cops is going to be there. Isn’t that wrong? It’s just wrong.”
I see your point, Chris, but I don't think the city is too concerned about the Police and the PBA looking like they're "in business" together. After all, barely any local media has scrutinized the issue, there's no public outcry, and this is a free market economy: PAY MONEY, BE IMPORTANT. There's a kind of blunt honesty to the whole deal.
I guess if Portlanders are happy with that, or too concerned with more important issues like getting in line first at Ikea, then I'm nobody to stand in their way.
I'm surprised that this hasn't gotten more attention, and the characterization of the funding of three police officers as "baksheesh" is spot-on.
I thought Portland isn't like a Third World country where you have to bribe politicians and public servants to do their jobs.
I'd at least like to have the illusion that the Portland Police are going to investigate a crime committed against me or a complaint I bring in the same manner as one brought by a PBA member.
You and the pubic do have that "illusion," Aaron. Everybody's perpetuating it. Unfortunately it isn't the truth.
Actually, if someone was interested in doing some journalistic type research, you would find that Chris is Correct in his saying "perhaps it should levy a fee or tax from those businesses." There is a fee that businesses downtown pay that the city collects. This is what makes up the "BID" or business improvment district. THE PBA through a long term contract with the city recieves this city-collected BID money. That is the money used to pay the city for these three officers. IE - the money to pay for these officers comes directly from a downtown business owners.
"if someone was interested in doing some journalistic type research.."
[looking round office]
Nope.
But thanks, BHR. More insights into the back and forth exchange of money would be most appreciated. At times it's hard to tell who the PBA is, and who the city government is. Since they all get a slice of the pie...
Comments Closed
In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).
I see no problem with police officers being assigned specific duties to work with a specific community. It's done all the time for schools, gangs, vice etc.
*BUT* if the City wishes to have a detail specifically for downtown businesses, perhaps it should levy a fee or tax from those businesses. Placing it in legislation would gaurantee the funds for the long-term, avoid the appearance that the Police and the PBA are "in business" together and make the Police accountable directly to the citizen-business owners and not the entity that lobbies on their behalf.