What do the mayoral candidates have to say about the homeless day access center? Let’s find out.

Stakeholders in Old Town Chinatown—homeless advocates, the Chinese community, residents, business owners, developers, the PDC—have been at odds over where to site a homeless day access center, raising issues about process and power as they debate future development in the neighborhood. How would you, as city commissioner, handle such a hot button issue? What’s the solution for siting the homeless day access center?

Vladislav Davidzon
Position sought: Mayor
Website: ourportland.org
Public financing status: Not participating

I remain unconvinced that the model of creating concentrated homeless centers is the way to approach the problem. The goal ought to be integration, not creation of ghettos and clusters of poverty. Diversity equals stability, and I believe what the city must do is force developers to integrate a *significant* number of homeless housing units into every new condo or apartment building that goes up in our city. Integration, not separation is the answer – no more creation of centers of poverty.

The same approach ought to be taken with homeless services. Rather than creating separate (for we know how successful “separate but equal” programs have been) soup kitchens, we ought to look at integration by demanding that foot service industry provide a percentage of their revenues back to the community in the form of food services to the homeless. Something like for every a hundred burgers sold by Burgerville, one must be served free to a homeless person. Take the same exact approach towards medical services, mental health, etc. Integration must be the key goal, not separate but equal.

I also think the “Not In My Back Yard” syndrome is hard at play here and this is a time when elected public officials must do the job they were elected to do – make hard decisions.

-s

Jim Lee
Position sought: Mayor
Website: blogmayor.com
Public financing status: Not participating

I can only second Amanda Fritz on this one. Our current Council does not follow its own rules, ignores public interest, and goes out of its way to mess up major public issues.

Here are four in the past twelve months:

1. Charter review and “strong mayor” governance

2. Street renaming

3. Sam’s street tax plan

4. Homeless center

If we follow the rules and respect all interested parties we can work all such issues out.

Never have I seen a group this inept in 35 years of Council watching. We need five new Council members. We can get four in this election cycle.

And a special to Kyle: If you can’t tell where others’ rants stop and where mine begin you need new bleeping eyeballs! I’m the one with fixie components on my face.

I’m calling you out, Kyle Burris, for the Mayor’s Mile at Alpenrose in May. You’ll know who I am after I go by you four or five times. If you have the stones to show!

Sam Adams
Position sought: Mayor
Website: samforpdx.com
Public financing status: Not participating, capping contributions

As mayor my role would have two parts: First, facilitate a neighborhood-based decision. If that is not possible, be sure that I had thoroughly heard all perspectives before collaborating with my council colleagues on a final decision. During my tenure as city commissioner I have spent a lot of time in the city’s neighborhoods. One of things I have learned is that there is inherent leadership in our community. Perhaps nine times in ten neighborhood leaders do not need city hall to make their decisions for them. They simply need city hall to be a partner in facilitating a neighborhood-led decision. Occasionally neighborhood-based issues get so polarized elected leaders must end the debate with a final decision. These are always tough decisions but it is the council’s job to do that when necessary. When those rare and unfortunate situations occur, the tough decision I would add to the final council outcome would be grounded in a complete understanding of the issue based on the input from all sides.

The access center may prove to be one of those polarizing issues. I remain optimistic, however, that resolution can come from within the neighborhood. Homelessness and related issues are part of daily life in Old Town Chinatown and to date the neighborhood leadership has handled these issues extremely well. The list of those who have provided critical leadership through the years in various roles is long: Richard Harris, Gretchen Kafoury, Howard Weiner, Erik Sten, Bing Sheldon, and many, many more.

Portlanders have made the tough but honorable commitment to work to end homelessness and related challenges where other cities have simply sought to ignore it. The day access center is a part of that commitment.

When a home is found, we need to ensure the structure we build complements the important market-driven revitalization currently occurring in Old Town Chinatown. The city has worked hard to bring the University of Oregon, Mercy Corps, and others into the neighborhood.

As mayor I am confident the day access center is a benefit to all in the neighborhood. I think everybody concerned about the location of the day access center recalls that bigger picture and I am hopeful a neighborhood-based consensus will emerge shortly.

It’s the Portland way that I would be honored to nurture as mayor.

Craig Gier
Position sought: Mayor
Website: myspace.com/craiggierformayor
Public financing status: Not participating

One thing that everyone involved needs to understand is that if they want to get past this problem they need to cut out the third grade behavior. They all want the problem solved without having it in their back yard. The site needs to be built in an area where it is most accesible to the people who need it. As mayor I would simply inform them that this issue needs to be solved as soon as possible. These are people we are dealing with, not property value decreasers. I would spearhead an effort to have the center(hopefully centers) placed and open with in 6 months of taking office. Lets face facts there is no shortage of space downtown. The current city officials have done that for us. So lets use up that space. If there is enough money for 50 million dollar tram their is money for this. This is a promise that I will keep. Thank you.

Kyle Burris
Position sought: Mayor
Website: site not up yet
Public financing status: Not participating

You want to know how we get this center built? We just fucking do it.

I would never think to waste the city's time, listening to the NIMBY whinings of developers or business owners. It was their greed and capitalism that put these people out on the streets in the first place. And now they want to tuck them away somewhere dark and quiet, to protect their own profit margins? Fuck that. As mayor, I will help the homeless where I want, when I want. Bourgeoisie be damned.

There is only one interest group I want to talk to about this center, and that's the homeless themselves. Good questions are being asked about the general location and fundamental nature of this center, and I want to pose them to people it's really going to affect. I want to do a massive sit down with the city's entire homeless population. I want to find out their wants and needs, their hopes and dreams. These people are human beings, and I'll take their word on the situation over some suited office worker any day.

Sho Dozono
Position sought: Mayor
Website: shoformayor.com
Public financing status: Received initial certification for public financing today

The issue of the homeless day access center in Chinatown is one of leadership and management in city government. I support the Chinese American community in their continued negotiation with the City about where the Day Access Shelter should be located. Block U seems to be a better solution to the issue than Block 25. It should be noted that the issue of homeless centers extends beyond Chinatown. As Mayor, I will work with neighborhood associations, citizen and community groups, and small business owners to have a transparent dialogue about the opening of such centers. Residents and business owners alike should not be blindsided by announcements that a homeless center will be next to them. Recognizing that there is some resistance to having a center near one's residence and business, there must be a thoughtful, trustful, open process about the needs of the neighborhood as the locations of homeless shelters and centers are being determined. Right now, the process and dialogue appears to be broken. As Mayor, I seek to restore trust between the government and the people so we can solve problems with civility and transparency.

Jeff Taylor
Position sought: Mayor
Website: portland123.com
Public financing status: Participated, has not submitted any contributions

Did not respond by deadline.

Beryl McNair
Position sought: Mayor
Website: none
Public financing status: Participated, did not submit any contributions

Did not respond by deadline.

A 38-year-old woman pretending to be a 15-year-old boy becomes world famous for writing stories about his imaginary victimhood. Portland’s LA-transplant Nancy Rommelman has a 9-page cover feature at the LA Weekly, all about it. The irony, of course, is that the story about the woman behind JT Leroy is more interesting than the stories he never wrote.

She wears a wig, her fingers are gray, and she’s had what some might call excessive elective surgery — on her breasts, her nose, and her lips, which this afternoon show the pricks and puffiness of recent injections.

Great reading for your lost weekend, the whole story is spookily Warholesque, and at the same time, very much anti-Warhol. And anti-Van Sant. And then again, of course, very Warholesque. And very Van Sant. Are you still following at this point? Because I’m not…just go read the story and enjoy it.

And have a great weekend.

Street Roots director Israel Bayer has a thoughtful and punchy analysis of Thursday’s housing candidate forum over at his personal website.

I don’t personally know Nick or Jim, but they both seem like amazing individuals.

I haven’t decided who is the better candidate to move our city forward, but I’m strongly leaning on the Middaugh side of the fence.

Nick Fish was prepared. He was focused with his message, on target and well-versed in the policies of homelessness and housing.

I do think he dodged the question on civil rights. When asked what he would do to protect people on the streets civil rights, he gave the safe and bland answer, “being homeless is not a crime.”

Well, in fact, yes it is. And there’s several laws on the books that makes homelessness a crime. Instead of talking about the real issues surrounding civil rights and homelessness, he chose to talk about the day access center in Old Town/Chinatown, which in my mind has nothing to do with civil rights and everything to do with politics.

Middaugh on the other hand came out and said that the city needs to revisit the camping ordinance, sit-lie, and in his written answer talks about private security downtown. Will he follow through on these promises? Well, considering not even the great Erik Sten, who I consider one of my true heroes walked down that road. He held the powers that be off time, and time and again, but was never able to move us in a different direction on civil rights and homelessness.

Still, Jim has the guts to talk about the issue in an educated manner, much like Erik does. One of the most brilliant things about Erik’s tenure as a commissioner was he knew the role grassroots organizations played in the larger movement to get things done. I think Jim gets this.

It’s good to see homeless civil rights issues having a direct impact on candidates’ chances in this race. And I share Bayer’s enthusiasm for a public discussion of those issues. We’re yet to make an endorsement in this race, but I’d be curious to see what Nick Fish’s response is to Bayer’s musings…

Today at 10:00am the Oregon Liquor Control Commission heard testimony over proposed amendments that would provide music venues greater flexibility in allowing minors access to events where alcohol is served.
OLCC HEARING: CARY CLARKE TESTIFIES THIS MORNING

Currently, Oregon bars and clubs are prohibited from serving beer or alcohol at music shows which allow all ages to attend. In December, the committee voted 3-2 against an earlier version of the amendment, saying it was too vague and didn’t provide a specific enough means of controlling alcohol distribution. Since then, OLCC staff drafted a proposal with more specific plans as to how venue-owners would ensure an environment where minors couldn’t get their sneaky hands on a PBR. Whether it’s wristbands, hand markings, or minor-designated areas, the new revisions provide written guidelines for drinking control mechanisms. Read more about the history of the issue right here.

In addition to an OLCC staff representative, three people went on record this morning in support of the amendment. They argued that it was beneficial for everyone – young people, local bands, bar and club owners – to allow minors greater access to the arts. Supporters claimed Portland was one of the only major cities in America that didn’t allow for all-inclusive music shows. Cary Clarke of PDX Pop Now! was particularly passionate about the proposal’s benefit to young people, saying the opportunity to attend more shows was vitally important to their personal and artistic growth.

“The exposure to local arts at a young age - in particular the local music scene - has changed the lives of so many people I know for the better,” he said. “It’s doing young people a real disservice by limiting their ability to go see these shows.”

Also cited was the absence of data linking greater access for minors to an increase in underage drinking.

Christie Scott, the public affairs specialist for the OLCC, said that the new amendment would be completely voluntary for venue-owners.

“It would merely give them the option - not to mention the guidelines - for mixed-age events,” she said. “If owners were not enforcing their control plans, and they were in violation, then the state could take away the right to allow minors onto the premises.”

No one spoke in opposition to the new measures, and the OLCC says it has received 27 emails in support. The vote will take place on April 16th or 17th. Comments on the amendment can be emailed to Jennifier Huntsman, the Rules Coordinator for the OLCC, at jennifer.huntsman@state.or.us.

2/28 UPDATE: See this post for a clarification of Abbott’s comments.

I’m writing to correct my statements made to you last Friday, which were reported in your Election 2008 blog 2/22/08. I made a mistake by saying that Steph Dozono is not affiliated with the Sho for Mayor campaign. Obviously as the daughter of the candidate she is by virtue affiliated.

Additionally, Steph had an integral role in the campaign launch. While I do not see Steph at our campaign headquarters often, she does volunteer on behalf of the campaign, assisting with campaign-related events.

In my statement last Friday, I did not intend to say that she does not play a role in her Dad’s campaign. My intent was to clarify that she was not speaking on behalf of the campaign.

While Steph does not speak on behalf of the campaign, she is very active in working to get her Dad elected. I used poor word choice in representing Steph Dozono’s role in the campaign, and am writing to amend my past statement.

UPDATE: I heard back from Amie Abbott, Dozono’s campaign manager. Are they thinking of switching to private financing?

“We do not have any intentions whatsoever of switching to go private financing. We’re committed to going the public financing route, and we’re confident that the auditor will get us our certification and we’ll be running,” she says.

She wanted to add that “Stephanie Dozono is not authorized to speak on behalf of the dozono campaign.”

Why does that matter? Because the questions to the auditor came from Stephanie, Sho’s daughter. The answers to the questions were cc’d to Dozono, Abbott, and the campaign’s treasurer. I had requested all communication between the Dozono campaign and the auditor’s office over the past week; None of the communications came from Dozono staffers claiming Stephanie wasn’t authorized to ask the questions.

Abbott adds: “She’s an innocent child who I would assume is just sort of feeling things out as a child of a parent running for office. She in no way shape or form speaks on behalf of the campaign. I want you to clearly understand that Stephanie Dozono is not affiliated with our campaign.”

Indeed, Stephanie Dozono sent the questions from her personal email account. However, I’ve received a campaign press release from Stephanie, sent from a steph@shoformayor.com email—on January 14 she reported that the campaign had reached the halfway point in collecting contributions, and she’s spoke to the press during the signature gathering effort, updating on the campaign’s progress.

***

Originally posted at 10:38 am: The Sho Dozono campaign has turned in all of the paperwork needed to address the issues the auditor’s office outlined in Dozono’s initial certification letter for public financing. The Auditor now has 10 business days—by March 5—to make a final determination on whether Dozono gets roughly $160K in public funding.

But it looks like the Dozono campaign is stressing about that determination, and what happens if it triggers a complaint from another mayoral candidate—which would in turn result in a hearing before a city hearings officer.

Earlier this week, the Dozono campaign submitted a list of questions to the auditor’s office, asking things like:

Would a certification hearing or a request for a certification hearing delay the potential certification of Sho Dozono or delay the distribution of funds were Sho Dozono to be certified[?]

and

If an appeal is filed from another candidate in the Mayor’s race, is a press release also issued with this notification to the media, or is a hearing related to certification considered between the disputing parties?

Clearly, the campaign is concerned that questions over the poll—which Dozono finally reported in ORESTAR on February 15 as an in-kind from himself, but backdated to December 21—are likely to lead to a hearing. Their concerns aren’t unfounded: The auditor has also responded to a question from the Adams campaign, asking if the auditor’s determination that the poll doesn’t exceed the $12K in-kind cap for publicly financed candidates is a final determination, subject to appeal. (Answer: No, that determination won’t be subject to appeal until the final determination letter is issued—the one due by March 5.)

The Dozono campaign’s most revealing questions, however, are these:

Regarding a status change: What is the process for a candidate to change from a participating to a nonparticipating candidate[?]

During the appeal process/certification hearing, can Sho Dozono decide during the process to withdraw as a Participating Candidate?

If Sho Dozono were to choose to change from a Participating candidate to a non-participating candidate before certification, the City Code seems to indicate that this needed to happen before the end of the Qualifying Period. Can a participating candidate change to non-participating status after the end of the Qualifying Period (January 31)?

I’ve asked the Dozono campaign if they’re considering a switch, to get out ahead of any negative publicity that could come with a hearing or disqualification. I’ve yet to hear back from the campaign from questions I asked about the poll’s reporting on Tuesday, but if they respond to my new inquiry, I’ll update here.

Rumor mill has it that a group is organizing what can only be called a public stunt this Saturday afternoon in downtown Portland. Details are sketchy at best, but word is it may have potential to stop traffic. To say anything further would spoil the surprise, but let’s just say if you’re curious, you might want to be on Burnside in front of Powell’s tomorrow, say around 3:15.

A similar stunt was performed at Grand Central Station, and for further clues, you might want to watch this movie.

Blogtown, bringing you only the finest in unsubstantiated rumors and hearsay!

After a BEAGLE (of all breeds) won last week’s Westminster Dog Show, it got me to thinking… Where’s the show that awards the most DESPISED dog? Here’s your chance to vote, Blogtownies! Below is a list of the most generally despised dog breeds in the world, so vote for your least favorite.
(Don’t see your least favorite in the list? Post it below in the comments! And don’t forget to tell us why you despise your most despicable dog!)

WHICH BREED OF DOG DO YOU MOST DESPISE?

THIS POLL IS NOW CLOSED. Check HERE for results and updates!

I haven’t been to one of Super Project Lab’s Meet Your ——, improv nights, but they are allegedly very funny, and sound fun. From their website:

Truth and fiction collide when special guests from the Portland community share true, unrehearsed recollections from their lives. Their stories serve as inspirational fodder for each evening’s improv.

That is, guests tell their interesting life stories, then the Super Project Lab improvisers use the stories as jumping off points for funny-making. Past guests have included author Mark Acito, the Bus Project’s Jefferson Smith, circuit court judge Susie L. Norby, and Rose City Rollers president Kim Stegeman. Quite the roster, right? Tonight it’s “Meet Your Reporter”, with…. No, we weren’t invited. Oregonian Columnist Ryan White; and tomorrow night is “Meet Your Blazer Broadcaster”, with either Mike Barrett, Mike Rice, or Brian Wheeler (it’s a surprise! or they just hadn’t decided yet when they wrote the press release).

Portland Center Stage Studio at the Armory, 128 NW 11th Ave, 10:30 p.m., $10, call 445-3700 for tickets.

Hooray for Saturday morning cartoons! We’ve already got at least one occasional screening of old cartoons with the Waypost’s Saturday Morning Cartoon Extravaganza; now there’s another, with Saturday Morning Mix-Tape, which’ll go down at Backspace (115 NW 5th) tomorrow at 10 am. Admission’s free, and the selected cartoons promise to range from “rare gems to the totally absurd,” reminding you of the good stuff (like Mr. T and The Real Ghostbusters) and introducing you to stuff “you never knew existed.” (Seriously, did anyone know about this? Anyone?)

Thanks, Rubik! God you’re a creepy little fuck.

It’s time once again for “Your Friend, the ’90s”—a glance backwards at the shiniest pop from the previous decade. Plus today is “Perfect Hook Friday,” which means we only choose the hookiest of songs! And I defy you to pick a song hookier than today’s selection, The Offspring’s 1994 debut hit single, “COME OUT AND PLAY (KEEP ‘EM SEPARATED).” Basically this song is just one great hook after another, and I remember the first time I ever heard this on the radio, the DJ freaked out so much he played it twice in a row. And I was thankful.
BEST PART OF THE VIDEO: The song.
WORST PART OF THE VIDEO: Omigod, where do I begin? The cornrows? The horrible F/X? The stupid and irrelevant vintage snake charmer clips? The fact that this had to be shot by an AV student? WHATEVER. This is still an awesome song that’s perfect for stepping on the gas.

Marjorie originally posted this over on Mod, but if you’re still hashing out your weekend plans, and you’re looking for something to do after church on Sunday, this could be right up your alley.

The Red Light Clothing Exchange, Portland’s celebrated buy-sell-trade men’s and women’s fashion emporium, will host their popular, annual Co-Ed Naked Shopping Spree at the Hawthorne store on Sunday, February 24. Four contestants (2 male, 2 female, chosen from hundreds of customer entries) will strip down to nothing at 5 pm, then have three minutes to run through the 7500 sq. ft. store – in front of hundreds of onlookers — and put on as many clothes as possible. Whoever pulls on the most garments wins everything on their body plus a $100 Red Light gift card. (Prizes will also be given to first, second, and third runners up.)

Live music by Roll One kicks off the in-store event beginning at 3 pm, and door prizes will be awarded throughout the afternoon. According to Visuals Manager Ryan
White, “customer response to the Shopping Spree has been incredibly enthusiastic. We already have a record number of people entered for a chance to compete in it. And
we’re all really looking forward to it, because it’s like having a big party during store hours.”

Started in 1999, The Red Light Clothing Exchange is one of Portland’s most prominent independent businesses. It has been featured in numerous national and
international media; it was named by GQ as one of the 100 best independent shops in the country and dubbed by Lucky as their favorite shopping destination in the city.

The Red Light has downtown (333 SW 10th St.) and Hawthorne (3590 SE Hawthorne Blvd.) locations; the Naked Shopping Spree will take place at the Hawthorne store.

Shy contestants may opt to wear a store-provided sequined G-string.

Remember, folks! Forget about the pants. Pants take forever to put on. Meanwhile, cruise on over to Mod, an all-you-can-wear blogging buffet.

1.Tonya!!! The rock opera premiered last night, and including Ian McKellen as King Lear at the New Theater in Covent Garden last December, it’s the best piece of theater I’ve ever seen. It’s destined to be a smash hit, with international productions and a movie deal, so mark my words, skeptics. And read the review in next week’s paper. And for God’s sake, GO, before the New York Times tells you to. Incredible…
NOT SO MUCH KITSCH: As straight-up awesome…I shivered…I wept…it tapped into something deep within me…like a live version of Dirty Dancing or Stand By Me…just incredible…

2.DUCT TAPE!!! Ban is up for a vote in council next month, announces the Tribune. Apparently there’s some controversy over the issue.

3.OBASSASSINNAMA!!! The Secret Service stopped local cops screening people for guns at his rallies. Now there’s a great idea.

4.BUSHDANCE!!! In Africa…classic:

5.DEBATE!!! Clinton turns nasty to stop the freight train. It doesn’t seem to work. It’s just his time, Hillary. Let it go.

Good Day.

My “Meet the Contenders” posts of earlier today are already out of date—a few candidates were officially certified as publicly financed candidates today.

That’s not to be confused with initially certified—everyone who turned in more than 1,000 signatures and contributions successfully cleared that hurdle, got an initial certification letter, and had 10 business days to clear up any outstanding paperwork issues, like returning prohibited contributions.

Once candidates take care of the administrative details, the auditor has another 10 business days to official certify or deny a candidate their public funds. Amanda Fritz and Charles Lewis have already been certified.

Today, Chris Smith and John Branam were also officially certified, which leaves just Jeff Bissonnette outstanding in that race.

In the other council race, Jim Middaugh is the only candidate awaiting final certification.

And in the mayoral race, Sho Dozono is also awaiting final certification (last I heard on Tuesday, his campaign was finishing up the paperwork they needed to turn in by the 28th).

Few minutes from tip-off against our neighbors from the north – who, consequently, are exactly the kind of team (14-38) you want to face when you’re sitting on a five-game losing-streak. Official line has Blazers winning by 9(!). That sounds a little high to me…

But there’s some more important news! THERE’S BEEN A TRADE!

Channing Frye and Travis Outlaw have been sent to the Denver Nuggets for….

Nah… But there really was a trade involving the Nuggets and Blazers today. Portland shipped the amazingly named Taurean Green (reminds of Dorian Grey) for the oddly named Von Wafer (think Von Lmo).

I don’t know about that one. Figured Green had some potential, but we’ll see. I’ll try and poke around at half-time and see what I come up with… What we do know is that Wafer has seen about as much NBA action as Green…

Tip-off for this late national game coming soon… No sign of Craig Sager and his bad suits… too bad. Think he worked the early game… And by any chance did you see when Steve Nash blew his nose on Sager’s pocket hanky at the All Star game? Brilliant.

Nice little surprise for the national anthem – Joshua Redman, a jazz saxaphonist in town for the Jazz Fest killed it. He’s playing with his quartet tomorrow and it should be a killer show.

Few more pre-game notes: The Blazers beat the Sonics back on Christmas day, which was then their 11th win in a row. Tonight is the first of a home-and-home series, meaning the Blazers head up to Seattle for another game tomorrow night.

The house goddamn packed right now… the late start cuts out all the stragglers, who otherwise would’ve wandered in during the first quarter.

Oh, and one other thing—saw Darius Miles’ famed whip on the way in, and man, that sucker is something. Just ridiculous as hell. In a good way. Biggest wheels I’ve ever seen. Do they make 26”s?

First Quarter

10:30 - Jarrett Jack again gets the start over Martell Webster… He’s guarding Kevin Durant, which seems like a real tough cover for the smaller Jack. Blazers off to a quick start. LaMarcus drains his first two. 4-0.

6:00 - So much for LaMarcus' quick fast start. He's missed his last... four, five, six? Time to pass it out, buddy. On the other end Durant gets his first two on a smooth, knifing, fast-break layup. And what's this? Jack actually sticks a three? Wow. 11-11.

Blazers asked who they’d sit next to on a long flight. Darius says Jesus, which is all well and good, except the art they show behind him is Jesus from South Park. Bad taste. Channing Frye comes up with the awesome meta-answer: himself in 20 years.

4:00 – Durant checking Roy. Fouls him and Roy drains it. And one… that is, if he would’ve made the free throw. In other news, Robert Swift is the ugliest player in the NBA. There’s a consensus up here on press row – everyone’s laughing at him. And really, they should. He took a bad situation, and with a terrible long red ponytail, a slug goatee, and some ridiculous tattoos, made it worse.

Been noticing a strange trend with Brandon Roy lately – he’s complaining to refs more than he used to. Maybe all this all-star business is going to his head…

Lots of missed baskets… Portland 13, Seattle 16.

2:50 – Although Kevin Durant has yet to really come into his own, he’s still amazing to watch. His moves are smooth like a flowing stream of a feather in the air. Dude is going to really be something, and in the end may well make us regret picking ol’ Greg…

Speaking of Greg, HOLY SHIT! Dude has a badass mowhawk with lines! Oh man… we’re gonna have to talk to him about that one. I’ve been holding out hope for a big ‘ol 70’s fro, but this mowhawk (and indeed it is an honest one – no faux) is really something.

0:00 – Travis for three, which is answered immediately by a lazer from Durant. But does Durant have a fucking badass Mohawk? Hell no. And does he have Brandon Roy, who sticks a wide-open three? No sir, he does not. Bullshit foul call right before the buzzer sends Johan Petro to the line. At the end of one, Portland 23, Seattle 25.

Second Quarter

9:37 – After just making a three, Martell gets fouled on another. Heads to the line for three. He’s got to start making free throws. A shot as pure as his, there’s no excuse. Like I said last game, dude just needs to relax -- yoga, valiuum, sex, whatever. Hits two of three. Blazers up three, 28-25. That paragraph had way to many “three’s” in it.

6:19 - That old Oregon boy Luke Ridnour just knocked down back-to-back triples. Strange to me that he's lost his starting position to Earl Watkins. But then again, we all know PJ Carlisimo is a fucking tool. Spreezy-Weezy (my favorite player) gave him just what he had coming with the chokeout. My only hope is that someone else does the same and PJ gets fired before he has a chance to ruin Kevin Durant's career. Portland 37, Seattle 36.

5:56 – This just in: Sorry ladies. Robert Swift has a right knee sprain. Will not return. Awwww… I’m probably the only one in this entire arena that’s disappointed. Swift is comic gold… Fuck. Get well soon buddy.

3:29 – Blazers on a mini-run here. Outscored Seattle 7-1 in the last three minutes to take a 44-37 lead.

0:00 – Wild few minutes to end the quarter. Fast breaks, turnovers and a now a 10-point Blazer lead. Yeah buddy.

Halftime

A note on the trade: according to Jason Quick from the Oregonian, the Green for Wafer trade was made primarily for size. Green was forced to play shooting guard at practice. Plus Wafer’s got a good outside shot. But primarily, this is a trade that will effect practice more than games.

Third Quarter

8:40 – Although he still can’t seem to find his shot, LaMarcus is still having an impact. He’s got FIVE blocked shots, the last coming on Nick Collison under the basket. And it paid off. On the other end LaMarcus finishes with a dunk on the break. Sonics call a quick timeout, feeling the danger that this thing might get out of hand. I mean, it might get ugly – Robert Swift’s mom ugly. Booyah! Portland 61, Seattle 47.

Petro denied on another feeble attempt at a monster dunk. You suck bro! Don’t even try.

6:39 – Przybilla robbed of a sweet dunk by a shot-clock violation. Sonnofa! On the next possession Jarrett Jack misses everything – and he wasn’t even deep! It was like a 15-footer. What the hell… next Blazer to hit the ol’ dusty trail? One can only hope. Portland, up by ten, take a time out.

The Blazer dancers are trash. Are you feeling me on this one? They’re sloppy like girls from Beaverton on a Friday night. And would it kill them to get at least ONE non-white member on the squad? Shit. Get it together girls – this aint the Dixie.

3:31 – Portland’s offense has gotten The Dumb. That’s ANOTHER fucking 24-second violation. And Seattle aren’t known for their defense. Good lord. These Blazers never do make it easy on themselves, do they? Seattle has whittled down the deficit to six. 63-57.

2:04 - Thunderous two-handed dunk by LaMarcus. And ANOTHER BLOCK by the Portland bigman on the other end. Another fast break. Martell almost comes with a sick dunk before he’s fouled by Earl Watson. Portland’s lead back to nine.

0:00 - A three from Watson and a sweet reverse layup from Kevin Durant that goes in despite a substantial foul brings the Sonics back within three. This is what happens when young teams meet.

After a few foul shots from each side, the Blazers lead it by three as we head to the fourth and final quarter. Portland 70, Seattle 67.

Alright. Blaze the Trail Cat is dunking, and since I’m in press row, no shouting. So I’ll shout it to Al Gore’s internet: YOU SUCK BLAZE!

Fourth Quarter

11:00 – After a defensive three call against the Blazers, Seattle ties things it at 70. Then the Sonics get his with a D-3 call of their own. And then, JESUS CHRIST! The Blazers pick up ANOTHER MOTHERFUCKING SHOT CLOCK VIOLATION! Get a clue. Run some plays. Do something. Seattle should not shut you down.

9:21 – Mo. Men. Tum. Portland has none of it right now. Just looking dazed and confused like they spent the last fifteen minutes with Damon Stoudamire and Sheed in a yellow Hummer. What is going on here. Seattle actually has a one point lead.

And Travis Outlaw steps out of bounds! Another Portland turnover. My lord. Seattle 74, Portland 73.

Jarrett Jack hits a three. Strange I know, but right now I'll take it. And Portland will take a two-point lead.

7:39 - Joel Przybilla is fouled, scores, and it wasn’t a dunk. A banking hook shot. I shit you not. Three point play for Joel. Portland up five.

Jarrett Jack gets away with steps, scores and is fouled. Sshhh. Don’t tell. Misses the free throw. Durant scores with a floater on the other end. That boy can play, and the Sonics are going to him down the stretch. Good stuff.

Alright, I give Jack some shit, and I’m not going to stop in the future, but he’s pulling the Blazers through here. Hits a deep two.

5:42 - On the other end Przybilla knocks the shit out of Durant, taking him to the floor. Durant keeps his composure and hits the free throws. Kid is feeling it. Portland 85, Seattle 79 as Jack fouls Ridnour. Timout, free throws to follow.

LaMarus draws a big-time charge on Kevin Durant. Big because the bucket when in. It was close. Good play young man.

4:19 - After Outlaw gets swatted, Durant gets stripped on the ensuing break. Great defense from Webster to get the strip and avoid the foul. Ball bounces off Durant’s leg and out of bounds. Timeout Portland. They’ve got a seven point lead.

Brandon Roy’s got a new career high with 13 boards.

2:09 – Collison misses a shot right at the rim – a HUGE miss for Seattle. That could be the difference right there. On the other end, Roy draws a foul. MISSES THE FIRST! Oh Antonio Harvey, I heard you behind me saying these were as good as makes! You jinxed it! ROY MISSES THE SECOND!

OH MY. ON THE OTHER END JEFF GREEN SKYS IN FOR AN AMAZING PUT BACK DUNK. HE FLEW ALL THE WAY IN FROM YESTERDAY. HOT DAMN. But it’s also a Goddamn. Roy chucks up an airball.

The Blazers haven’t scored a field-goal since the 6:15 minute mark. Terrible, as Charles Barkley would say. Still, with 1:14 to play, the Blazers are clinging to a three point lead. 87-84.

:39.9 – Travis bum rushes through the lane, soaring for a dunk that probably would not have happened, but Nick Collison bites and fouls Travis, who nails both of his free throws. Blazers up five, which should put an end to their five-game losing streak. Phew.

:11.0 - Sonics manage a two, but the Blazers respond finding a wide-open LaMarcus Aldridge under the hoop. Almost slams away the game, but is fouled and makes one of two. Still, Blazers gonna win this, the Sonics are just wasting our time. They're like Huckabee to the Blazer's McCain. Hillary to Portland's Obama. Just pack it up and get outta town, losers! (Especially you, Clinton.)

Alright—this one’s done. Blazers should’ve won it by more, but I’ve got a good friend in Vegas who is happy Portland didn’t cover. Tomorrow’s matchup in Seattle should be pretty heated. But then again, if Portland can pull their heads out of their asses on offense, the win will come a lot easier.

Final score: Portland 92, Seattle 88. Roy and Travis Outlaw share the high-score for Portland with 19 apiece. Roy grabs a career-high 14 boards.

When it’s all said and done, it’s a near fucking miracle the Blazers pulled this one off. They didn’t score a field goal over the final six minutes…. Jesus.

That’s it from the Rose Garden. Over and out.

-Tonry

RACIAL PROFILING: Serious issue when it comes to who’s getting guns drawn…

Having gone through some ins and outs over whether the racial profiling committee is on the record or not, (and I suspect those ins and outs may not be completely done with, just yet) here’s a sample of the discussion that took place at today’s meeting:

Officer Deanna Wesson: “It’s not just race. It’s race and actions. If you’ve got someone who you know is a violent criminal, then it’s about their actions. If you hear repeatedly hear the description of a robbery suspect over the radio, saying ‘it’s a young black male with a puffy coat,’ does it change your mind?”

Jo Ann Bowman, Director of Oregon Action: “So I’m curious. Does it create a mindset, if you hear on the radio constantly, it’s a 15-20 year-old black male wearing a puffy coat, does that create the expectation that if there’s a young man dressed like that, they have to prove that they’re not up to anything?”

Sergeant Dave Hendrie: “Does that enter into my filtering or decision to stop? Absolutely. When I look at a group, it becomes dangerous ground. Demeanor has a lot to do with it. If they say ‘hey, how you doin?’ it’s going to be different. I’m supposed to stop people as part of my job.”

Bowman: “I really appreciate your honesty. So how many African American male kids wear hoodies and puffy jackets? In fact, you know, it’s a community standard. But we know less than 10% of our kids are truly involved in criminal behavior. So it does create this difficult dynamic. How de we merge these two things? On the one hand 90% of kids are doing nothing wrong, and on the other hand, 10% of our kids are doing 50% of the crime. It’s really sad, in my view, that these 90% of kids who are doing nothing wrong expect to be stopped and searched.”

Detective and Police Union President Robert King: “How do we differentiate and make sure we stop exactly the right people for exactly the right reasons? How do we do that? You’re asking the question, Jo Ann, but I’m pushing it back on you. This is the tension. There are competing rights and interests.

Hendrie: “As an officer you can see why I have a personal frustration on this issue. On the one hand we have a community that says it doesn’t want its kids to be jacked up, but the problem is, nobody wears a sign saying “I am a criminal” these days. The days where it was 4 guys, all wearing red, giving me the stink-eye, they may as well have worn a sign saying ‘I’m a blood guy’. And the same on the other side with the blue clothes. But then gangs tell us ‘We don’t fly our colors anymore, because you guys stop us. So it moves to sholeaces, and jewelry, and tattoos. How do you police a population over-represented with crime, without infringing on their rights?”

Police Chief Rosie Sizer: “I think part of it is to have officers who know the community as well as we can. We need to train officers to be the best sorters they possibly can be.”

Hendrie: “For me it’s about being more honest and more humble.”

And so on. More next month. Read more about the committee and download minutes here, at the mayor’s website, or right here, at the Mercury.

This week on Easier Than Reading—your weekly music podcast that’s sort of like reading the music section of the Mercury… only easier—join your host Andrew R. Tonry as he makes jokes about Hillary Clinton and fills you in on what shows you need to check out this week. Plus hear tunes from bands including Blitzen Trapper, Monotonix (pictured above), Jeff Lewis, Danava, and MORE! Check it out here.

Seven of the five candidates for Erik Sten’s city council seat gathered at the First Unitarian Church on SW 12th at lunch time to field a series of questions on affordable housing and homelessness.
MARC JOLIN OF JOIN: Introduces Nick Fish, Ed Garren, Jim Middaugh, Fred Stewart and Harold C.Williams II…

CHURCH: Rammed with about 150 affordable housing and homeless advocates…

Jim Middaugh made much of his endorsement by outgoing commissioner, Erik Sten. He is also the only grassroots candidate in the race, and began by saying he knows “what it takes to get a community motivated to do great things,” giving his ability to raise 1700 signatures in 10 days as an example.

Fred Stewart said his mother’s decision to stay in Northeast Portland 20 years ago drove his involvement with the community. He said he’s seen how public involvement can make a change, but also how the private sector can help.

Nick Fish said he’s proud of the endorsement of Sten’s predecessor, Gretchen Kafoury, and that he’s asking, who is going to step up and lead the change for affordable housing?

Harold Williams said very few people know how to navigate the housing system, currently, and kept pushing the message of increased accessibility for end users.

Ed Garren said he owns a manufactured home on Hayden Island, and that he’s been an economic justice advocate for a long time. He said landlords, right now, are making people homeless out of greed, and proposed rent stabilization in the city. Garren, like Middaugh, also makes a solid grassroots case—he collected signatures to even appear on the ballot, and he’s been successfully increasing traffic to his campaign website through word of mouth.

Tamara DeRidder and Nick Popenuk weren’t present.

Both Fish and Middaugh, who seem to be emerging as the two favorite contenders for this race, had concrete proposals for increasing the accountability of the Portland Development Commission to build more affordable housing with urban renewal money.

Fish said he’d ask, if elected, for an audit of the PDC by the city, and proposed a “use it or lose it” scheme for money PDC didn’t spend in its urban renewal areas on affordable housing—where the money would go direct to the Housing Authority of Portland. He also wonders whether PDC is really the right body for providing affordable housing in the city, and told the room he’s not afraid to think “big picture” on the issue.

Middaugh said he’s met with the auditor to talk about how to ensure more accountability for PDC, and that like Fish, he’s interested in supporting the idea of diverting money from one urban renewal area to another in order to support projects. He said he thought PDC should be simplified.

When the candidates were asked what to do about laws affecting the civil rights of homeless people, Jim Middaugh responded: “Ask Matt Davis what to do.” Which was nice.

Middaugh said he’d revisit the city’s camping ordinance, which currently is having the most impact on people sleeping outside, and said he doesn’t necessarily support the sit/lie ordinance, either. “I understand some of the compromises Erik’s had to make to get the access center, but I think it’s time to revisit some of the agreements that have been made.”

Fish, meanwhile, said “being homeless is not a crime.” He said he’ll ensure there are no laws “enforced disparately against people because of their economic status.”

In their closing remarks, Middaugh said “I don’t think we need a housing wonk right now. I think we need somebody who can rally the troops, and inspire the public to step up.”

Fish, meanwhile, said he would convene a task force to address the apparent discrimination that goes on in the housing world. “When I read the Oregonian I see ads for housing, saying ‘section 8 vouchers need not apply’,” he said. “Is that what we’re about as a community?”

It’s a tough race between two, I’m sorry, seven, well qualified candidates. Let’s see who gets the edge over the coming weeks. Speaking of homeless issues, did you read this week’s feature yet?

Sherwood school administrators have yanked a school play about a boy bullied for shrugging off an argument over whether he’s straight or gay. Straight up homophobic cowardice, if you ask me. Of course, the Oregonian takes a more “balanced line.” Read it here.

Personally I loved being gay in high school. It was all boys. We had no choice. At least, that’s my line and I’m sticking to it.

It was widely reported last week that New Orleans-style eatery Lagniappe closed its doors. The Alberta Street location will soon be taken over by a new restaurant called Rock’s, which will serve American roadside diner food with extended late-night hours.

This is no consolation to the city’s lovers of Louisiana cuisine. However, there is a crescent-shaped light on the horizon. A new eatery called My Brother’s Crawfish is opening in the Universal Shopping Center near SE Divison and 82nd. The kitchen, naturally, puts emphasis on crawfish, with jambalaya, gumbo, and beignets also on the menu (check it out here). They’re hoping to open their doors on March 1st, a little too late for Mardi Gras, but still very welcome.

(If you can’t wait that long to get some of My Brother’s Crawfish, you could always get it from Katy McMalone, the slutty girl next door… sorry, bad joke.)

Though we rarely advertise it in our job listings, every Mercury employee is required to participate in a weekly dance class, in which we learn a brand new group routine. (It’s kind of like that Filipino “Thriller” prison, except we offer full dental.) ANYWAY, here’s this week’s Mercury Employee Dance Routine. It’s from a Japanese commercial for the videogame “The Legend of Zelda,” and… hold on? Is Link a chick? That’s super hot. ANYWAY, learn this dance by noon.

Here are the candidates for seat #1, on the issue of the week:

Stakeholders in Old Town Chinatown—homeless advocates, the Chinese community, residents, business owners, developers, the PDC—have been at odds over where to site a homeless day access center, raising issues about process and power as they debate future development in the neighborhood. How would you, as city commissioner, handle such a hot button issue? What’s the solution for siting the homeless day access center?

John Branam is up first:

John Branam
Position sought: Commissioner #1
Website: john4pdx.org
Public financing status: Awaiting final certification

Clearly the issue of where to situate a homeless day access center in Chinatown is one of the more challenging and seemingly divisive issues our city has faced in the last year. In several respects it is not too dissimilar from the conversation regarding the renaming of Interstate. In both cases there are passionate opinions on all sides of the issue as well as the omnipresent concern by neighbors and business owners that “the city” simply isn’t listening.

“Listening” cannot be undervalued. Although it most certainly must be coupled with a timely decision, it is critical that our city commissioners consider all reasonable options to highly contentious issues such as where to locate a homeless day access center in Chinatown. How we as a city decide to move forward on this and other similar issues says as much about our values and our priorities as the decision itself. Neighbors, business owners and all concerned citizens must feel like their opinions are heard, and genuinely appreciated. The invitation to provide input should not be, therefore, simply a token gesture. City Commissioners should approach this and all similar conversations with open minds that are subject to being persuaded.

Such an approach to Portland’s challenges and opportunities represents an important element of the collaborative and visionary leadership I would bring to City Hall. It is a leadership style that values all voices and all reasonable opinions. Being genuinely interested in the opinions and experiences of Portlanders who are actually doing the work is one of its hallmarks. So too is leading in a way that ensures our community conversations are both rigorous and respectful.

Leading collaboratively is something I have a lot of experience doing. I did so as Chair of the Arbor Lodge Neighborhood Association at a time when the neighborhood was undergoing tremendous change; I did it as the Program Manager of a highly successful educational non-profit in Washington DC where the established educational community was reticent to embrace our catalytic model; and I also did it for 2+ years in the Peace Corps in South Africa as I helped move forward a small rural community that had been torn apart by decades of apartheid. Portland needs City Commissioners that are collaborative and visionary in their leadership style, and this is precisely the value I would add to our Council.

In terms of the solution to locating the homeless day access center, it seems clear that doing so on block U represents the best solution. Not only would our doing so ensure Portland continues in its commitment to improving services and support for our homeless population (with the vision of ending chronic homelessness in ten years) but we also would also honor the concerns and wishes for a significant percentage of those living and doing business in Chinatown. Further, it appears that selecting block U represents an opportunity to save additional financial resources as compared to the leading alternative.

Chris Smith
Position sought: Commissioner #1
Website: citizensmith.us
Public financing status: Awaiting final certification

It’s important to recognize that there are multiple threads of conversation going on here.

The Old Town/Chinatown neighborhood has historically been supportive of the social service agencies located within its boundaries. It’s disheartening to see that as the demographics of the neighborhood change, this support is diminishing, and something that looks a lot like NIMBYism seems to be emerging.

But there are also legitimate questions being raised about whether Block 25 is indeed the right site within the neighborhood. Alternative sites have been suggested, and as Commissioner I would be careful to distinguish legitimate and thoughtful questions from NIMBY sentiments. My experience is that all too often the press and sometimes our leaders fail to distinguish between the two, labeling anything other than immediate support as NIMBYism.

My belief is that the day access center is a key part of the plan to deal with homelessness in our City, and this neighborhood is the location where the center can be most effective. My job as Commissioner would be first to listen, then to sort through the community response, teasing out the meaningful issues from the reactive noise and working to build the broadest possible base of support for an effective location.

Jeff Bissonnette
Position sought: Commissioner #1
Website: portlandersforjeff.com
Public financing status: Awaiting final certification

At the risk of raising the spectre of another "hot button issue," there is a story about labor organizer Cesar Chavez that I've thought about a lot recently:

Three young organizers, eager to learn from the best, drove through the night to see Cesar Chavez at his home. When they got there, they all sat down to talk. "Tell us, please,” they said, “the secret to being a good organizer.” Chavez replied, “Well, first you talk to one person, then you talk to another person…” “No, no, no," they said. "We want to hear how it really works. What you’ve done here that’s made farm worker organizing and the grape boycott so successful.” Chavez was silent for a moment.

“Well,” he said finally, “first you talk to one person, then you talk to another person…”

There's a powerful lesson in this story. Whether we're talking about the day access center or any other controversial issue, communicating person by person and constituency by constituency is central to making good policy decisions. In addition, other factors come into play as well: having a sense of the range of available options and staying open to a variety of possible outcomes is also key. Being able to differentiate between genuine concern and obstructionism is very important. And, lastly, determining when to be an advocate and when to be a facilitator is critical.

I believe my success as a community organizer over the years has come from ability to meld my particular vision with those held by potential allies and even potential opponents. To do that, it requires a lot of work to fully understand where others are coming from and what they want to accomplish.

I also try not to get stuck on a specific outcome but rather, I try to have an idea of a general result I would like to achieve and be willing to accept that the result could come about in different ways. Finally, I try to be perceptive about whether honest concerns are being raised in an attempt to move a process forward or whether obstacles are being thrown down to interfere with getting agreement on a plan or a policy.

Now to apply all that specifically to the issue of siting a day access center. First, I would meet individually with each constituency with a stake in the issue so that I could fully understand the issues each might have with the center's location. I would be very clear with all parties that I support the creation of a day access center but that I was not committed to a particular location. I believe a mistake that has been made in the discussion of a day access center is fixating on only one option: Block 25, the block bounded by NW 3rd and 4th Avenues and Flanders and Glisan Streets. This makes area neighbors and businesses suspicious because they then believe the result is cast in stone and increases their resentment. That does not lead to productive discussions. Last week, Block U, bounded by NW Broadway and 6th Avenue and Irving and Hoyt Streets, was acknowledged as another possible option and that is a positive development.

Charges of NIMBY-ism have been leveled at neighbors raising concerns about the day access center. While the characterization may be true in some cases, it does not apply across the board. If reasonable people are dealt with reasonably, usually a reasonable solution begins to develop. A critical mass of support can then be formed around this solution. Once that starts to happen, a broader consensus can overcome the obstacles put down by true NIMBY-ites.

Lastly, a city commissioner needs to understand when a situation calls for an advocate and when it calls for a facilitator. While it's obvious that a policymaker will have strong opinions about issues, my approach would be to be an advocate when my policy position is not already represented by a stakeholder at the table. With that in mind, there are able advocates involved in the debate who are raising the issues I would raise myself. So I would see my role as a city commissioner in the day access center siting issue as facilitating an acceptable solution that the various stakeholders could agree on so that a center could be built and sustained.

By acting in that facilitator role, I would seek to build a working coalition of interests that could support the day access center over time and would also then be in place to address other concerns once the day access center issue was settled. Ultimately, that is how long-term problem-solving is achieved: building the relationships to develop solutions and get results by talking to one person, and then talking to another person and then talking to another person....time after time after time.

Amanda Fritz
Position sought: Commissioner #1
Website: amandafritzforcitycouncil.com
Public financing status: Certified as a publicly financed candidate

As your next City Commissioner, I will facilitate finding solutions for all issues through respectful consideration of multiple viewpoints in open, inclusive discussions that follow public process rules. I did not wait to be elected to the Portland City Council before taking leadership on siting the Resource Access Center. I made time to research the problems, and acted to find solutions. I looked at the issues both from the perspective of a psychiatric nurse caring for people needing homes and services, and from the viewpoint of a former Planning Commissioner experienced in reviewing urban renewal and economic development proposals.

Here's what I did over the past two months, to illustrate how I will solve problems when I am on the City Council:
* I did not take a position before participating in the public process
* I attended an open meeting in the neighborhood and listened carefully
* I asked questions of people on both sides, and learned about the issues
* I made sure I knew and understood the rules by which the decisions must be made
* I promoted respectful consideration of alternative viewpoints of community participants, City Council members, and PDC Commissioners and staff
* I posted my analysis of problems and potential solutions, Public Process Problems, Block 25 and beyond.

I did this not because I thought it would help me win the election, but because Portland is my community and I wanted to help resolve this problem.

Portlanders care about public process, because it is vital to how our democracy functions. We know that when citizens are given accurate information and inspired to talk with each other, the community often comes up with great solutions. Once it became widely known that outcomes being presented as "Done Deals" are in fact subject to public review and votes, neighbors in Old Town Chinatown asking for alternatives to be considered began to be heard. It seems likely a solution will be reached for placing resources for homeless people in two locations within the neighborhood. This outcome is acceptable to many more stakeholders, and promotes multiple public benefits. Carol McCreary, a community leader in Old Town Chinatown, sent me this message earlier this week:

"Old Town Chinatown appears to be moving toward a resolution. We'll remain vigilant. And also work for healing. The controversy has drawn a range of talented people into the Neighborhood Association, providing energy to move forward strengthening community. But in the end, I think you made the big difference. Thank you."

As a City Commissioner, I will work with fellow Council members to ensure that all public input processes are set up in a way that allows Portlanders to participate in making legitimate and sound decisions. Neighbors, business owners, workers, and people needing services should not have to struggle to be heard. For over 15 years, I have wrestled with difficult issues in Portland city government and in neighborhoods. I've acted both as a mediator who seeks collaborative solutions, and as a leader who intervenes quickly when necessary. I am the candidate for Position 1 with the best record of resolving a broad range of problems all over Portland, producing results by turning arguing into agreement, talking into action.

Here is a question for my fellow Blogtown readers: Do you want to elect someone who waits quietly in the background during controversies until it's clear which side is winning, or do you want a new City Commissioner who will be out in the community helping citizens find solutions? When making your choice for Position 1, I ask you to look at what candidates have done for Portland, as well as what we say we are going to do.

Charles Lewis
Position sought: Commissioner #1
Website: charleslewis.com
Public financing status: Certified as a publicly financed candidate

When I am a Portland City Commissioner, I will handle similar issues by actively and meaningfully engaging all of the community’s stakeholders. City Council has gotten itself in trouble time and time again by not following established rules and regulations. When rules are discounted or waived for specific interests, it creates hard feelings and pits well intentioned people against one another.

My wife, Sarah, works at the Julia West Homeless Day Shelter right now. The center is completely overloaded, and there is often a line outside of people wanting to come in and simply use the bathroom or to get warm after a cold night on the streets. I’ve visited several times, and was impressed at how much homeless people are like everyone else -- they have families, some have jobs, and all have hopes, dreams, and aspirations. If I was on the street, I would want someone looking out for me.

In addition to being bad for our community, homelessness is bad for business. One of my jobs is running a bio-diesel powered amphibious tour company called Portland Duck Tours. Many visitors from out of town comment on how many homeless people are on our streets. For a business person or resident in Old Town / Chinatown, it must be especially difficult cleaning up after the approximate 3,000 people living on the streets every night. It’s not fair for certain neighborhoods to bear the overwhelming brunt of a much greater societal problem, and we must absolutely use city resources to help address this critically important issue.

I’m hopeful that Commissioner Sten will bring together the various stakeholders to find a solution that will appease most everyone. I know that there are different considerations involved with each of the potential sites, and am hopeful that the city can work together to find an amenable solution. As we know from past experience, though, the process in finding the solution is as important as the final result and can have long lasting impacts on the state of our community.

Have you seen the latest New York Magazine? It features a super creepy spread of Lindsay Lohan pretending to be Marilyn Monroe in a recreation of the “last sitting” photo session with Bert Stern, who also shot the original:

(original)

(not so original)

Check out the whole slideshow of outtakes here, and tell me if you think this means that in six weeks Lohan will die of an overdose.

Abandoning any and all artsy-fartsy pretense, Gears of War 2 now has a teaser trailer. It’s goofy and loud and lowest common denominator—but so was the first game, in a lot of ways, yet it still managed to be beautifully made and a hell of a lot of fun.

Thanks, Kotaku.

On President’s Day, Portlander MacGregor Campbell strapped a sign to his chest reading “say one word into the microphone” and walked from his house on the East Side, down to Pioneer Square, with a tape recorder. Listen to the results, here.

I love content like this. Stuff where people get off their asses and go out into Portland, asking questions. “Reporting,” I think is what it used to be known as, although these days it’s practically revolutionary.

If you think you can do better, send me your mp3.

Another Mercury music section to read while you get your new tentacle suction-cup implants. My arm tastes like calamari!

With UnonoU, Danava has established themselves as the damn coolest metal band around. Although no one has the heart to tell them they really misspelled the title of their favorite board game.
MP3: Danava - Where Beauty And Terror Dance

Nick Jaina has dug many a ditch, and worked many a menial job, but those all pale in comparison to the fact that he toured by Greyhound. On purpose! Good lord.
MP3: Nick Jaina - Power

John Darnielle from the Mountain Goats talks about the Lord, lo-fi, and Chilean black metal, but not in that order.
MP3: Mountain Goats - Sax Rohmer #1

Few things sound better than the pure, sweaty, chaos of a Monotonix live show. Plus, the singer’s bushy ‘stache? That is a lot of things, but ironic isn’t one of them.
MP3: Monotonix - Summers And Autumns

End Hits: Where every post today will mention calamari, Chilean black metal, or both!

This question is practically built for this race—the race to replace Erik Sten, who’s at the center of the storm:

Stakeholders in Old Town Chinatown—homeless advocates, the Chinese community, residents, business owners, developers, the PDC—have been at odds over where to site a homeless day access center, raising issues about process and power as they debate future development in the neighborhood. How would you, as city commissioner, handle such a hot button issue? What’s the solution for siting the homeless day access center?

First up is Middaugh:

Jim Middaugh
Position sought: Commissioner #2
Website: middaughforportland.com
Public financing status: Received initial certification letter

I’ve covered this topic on the Mercury Blog before but some of my thinking warrants restating. The truth is we need an access center and the place we need it is Old Town.

Everyone agrees that the decision process that initially resulted in a focus on Block 25 could have been communicated more effectively. That said, the siting of the access center is important and can not legitimately be considered a surprise. Substantial effort was made to find an alternative without success – until the Council decided to act. Only then was it possible to find a potential alternative.

Transition Projects and the Blanchet House need to replace antiquated facilities that no longer serve their clients or the surrounding neighborhoods. Both organizations rely on private donations and volunteers and need to maintain their separate identities. Improving client access to current services and reducing the impact of queuing on the neighborhood is a high priority for them and for me.

Over the years, these non-profit organizations have dedicated significant time and resources to reach out to their neighbors to help them understand their missions and visions. As required by the City, TPI will work with neighbors to develop and maintain a Good Neighbor Agreement. There will be ample opportunity for neighbors to continue to participate in that process. When I’m on the Council I will work to ensure the agreement is carefully monitored and enforced.

I also think that the PDC and Council discussion that has caused the focus to shift to Block U demonstrates that the Council will listen to reasonable and implementable alternatives to pressing needs. No one wants to impose something on a neighborhood. That said, the Council is charged with representing the entire City. Sometimes the Council must lead. That is what is happening with the access center. There would not be the level of agreement about Block U without leadership from the Council.

The challenge of leadership is pushing when necessary but listening when it results in improvements. I think we’ve struck the right balance on the access center.

The development of a more functional center to replace the current Glisan street facility is a key component of Portland’s ten year plan to end homelessness. I am a very strong supporter of the ten year plan. The characteristics of a successful center include having a design that not only eliminates the queuing on the streets by incorporating an interior courtyard but also one that has space to provide necessary services that will help people end their homelessness.

The center will improve the neighborhood.

Providing affordable housing above the center makes sense because it allows for replacement of low income housing that is being lost to redevelopment and ongoing rent increases in the immediate neighborhood. It also will ensure that new development in other areas can serve higher income tenants.

The city has explored numerous other possible locations to replace the old TPI access center and men’s shelter. Despite substantial time and effort, none of the other sites worked out until the City was moving forward on Block 25. Block U emerged as an alternative only when the Council made it clear that a decision was imminent. I’m pleased that additional effort to consider Block U appears to be working and I will support moving the new facility there should a final agreement be reached.

As I’ve said before, I pledge to ensure that the center will be a superior design which will galvanize the re-emergence of OTCT as a safe, livable, diverse and exciting neighborhood. The neighborhood’s participation in the process will help me succeed. The continued involvement of the neighbors and business owners of OTCT will guarantee that this facility will reflect Portland’s pride in our distinct neighborhoods and in our reputation of being a national leader in ending homelessness. In short, the process – while bumpy — is working.

I’ll never shut people out of the decision making process. On the other hand, I won’t shy away from difficult decisions when they need to be made — even if they make people unhappy. I will be honest, transparent and direct with supporters and opponents alike.

Ed Garren
Position sought: Commissioner #2
Website: edforportland.com
Public financing status: Participated, did not qualify

I have a neighbor who works at one of the centers in Chinatown that serves the homeless. Also I have a 30+ year career providing social services to a lot of different types of folks, including homeless persons.

By the way, I am NOT a Psychiatrist (improperly reported elsewhere). I am a Psychotherapist, Licensed Marriage Family Therapist, with a Master's Degree in Rehabilitation. So my training and background is very specific to the needs of the homeless population. One of the reasons I am running for this seat is that I am tired of tax dollars being spent in ways that often serve everyone except the people they are trying to serve.

The discussions in this issue have centered around land use issues, some "NIMBY" fears, speculations about redevelopment, etc.

Has anyone considered that having one large facility might not be be the best solution? Homeless people have social needs and circles, just like the rest of us. One aspect of those needs has to do with not wanting to associate with a certain group, or individuals. If the solution offered is one large facility, many people will not come for services because people they don't like are there. Also, the management needs of dealing with a large group of people with mental health and addiction problems might prove challenging. One large facility might become an albatross, or worse, have constant chaos and internal management problems.

We know that schools with large classes don't work very well. What kind of day care would you take your child to, a large one with many children, or a smaller one where your child will have intimate contact with a few caring people? It's the same idea with social services. Smaller more intimate agencies, where there is genuine contact between staff and clients, work better.

The people who are making decisions in this process should consider that if the city has to give away 311 million dollars ($311,000,000) to make it happen, something is basically wrong with the project.

Might the needs of the homeless be better served by a few smaller facilities that are spread around the edges of downtown? A centrally located management and referral office could then triage persons to an appropriate facility which has a focus for the needs of a particular situation.

I've also proposed that the city needs to encourage the creation of more Single Resident Occupancy (SRO) facilities. Specifically I have said that these facilities should not be built exclusively for the homeless or those on public subsidy. They might instead be integrated private sector, non-profit facilities, which also serve the large population of single people in the city who just want a place to stay and are not interested in a large living space. A percentage of units in each of such facilities could be dedicated units which offer housing for "emergency" uses, those on assistance, seniors, etc. But the bulk of the facility would be affordable market rate rentals for "regular" people.

What I've learned from three decades of doing social services work is that no large problem is ever solved by one big solution. Resolving human problems takes creating situations which involve the formation of productive relationships. When a facility gets too large, it is no longer providing human services. It becomes a "factory" and it's ability to serve the people who come for help goes away.

Instead of government creating large solutions that look good, but are not always responsive to the actual needs, government should be encouraging innovation and facilitating multiple smaller solutions.

While many homeless persons are homeless because of economic circumstances, which is why I am proposing Rent Stabilization, many more are in need of mental health and addictions treatment. Such treatment rarely works well in a large impersonal facility.

A simple example of this are the different needs of homeless youth (who are often GLBT or have "graduated" the foster care system) vs the adult homeless who may have chronic mental health or addiction issues. A large facility which tried to serve both populations would probably be less effective than two or three smaller facilities which could focus on the special needs of each group. A smaller facility would be much less objectionable to any neighborhood.

The one over-arching constant for most homeless people is that they don't like to be in large situations with a lot of people they don't know. A large facility would be handicapped from day one for this reason. Does the city really want to take a $311,000,000 gamble that way?

With $311,000,000 a lot of good services could be provided. Moreover, they can be provided by a variety of service providers that can do good work with the nuances of a wide variety of people with different needs.

I would suggest that leadership in this city reconsider this current approach to the issue and try to consider a more multi-faceted approach utilizing and funding several smaller facilities.

$311,000,000 is a LOT of money.

Ed Garren, candidate for Portland City Council, seat #2
www.edforportland.com and www.edgarren.us

Harold C. Williams Two
Position sought: Commissioner #2
Website: none
Public financing status: Not participating in program

First, I have to ask the question “Have these groups set down and talked face to face?” and if they have not I think to do so would be a good start.

Second, I suggest that the Homeless Day Access center temporarily be place at City Hall, until we worked out a long term solution.

-Harold C. Williams Two
Candidate for Portland City Commissioner position (2)

Nick Fish
Position sought: Commissioner #2
Website: nickfish2008.com
Public financing status: Not participating in program

There is a lesson to be learned from the way City Hall handled two highprofile issues impacting Old Town Chinatown: the proposed renaming of 4th Avenue in honor of Cesar Chavez, and the siting of the day-access center for homeless people. To summarize: the longest distance between two points is a shortcut. Regrettably, most of the conflict could have been avoided.

I attended the February 14th Portland Development Commission hearing on the siting of the day-access center in Old Town Chinatown. No one spoke against the access center. Rather, a number of community members expressed concern about the proposed location (Block 25), the concentration of homeless services in their neighborhood, and the process brokered by the City.

During the hearing, the nonprofit operator of the access center, Transition Projects, Inc., expressed a desire to move to Block U – across from the post office on North Broadway. After talking to many of the stakeholders in Old Town Chinatown and the River District, I support moving the access center to Block U, and expanding Blanchet House on its current site, Block 25.

I have 20+ years of experience building coalitions to get things done. As City Commissioner, I will (1) work hard to make sure that all voices in our community are heard before decisions are made, and (2) insist that the Council follows its own rules.

Tamara DeRidder
Position sought: Commissioner #2
Website: home.earthlink.net/~tdr4pdx
Public financing status: Participating, no contributions reported yet

Did not respond by deadline

Nick Popenuk
Position sought: Commissioner #2
Website: popenukisportland.com
Public financing status: Participating, 15 contributions as of 1/22

Did not respond by deadline

•McCain has strongly denied doing the chicka-chicka-wow-wow with a female lobbyist. Ooh-wee, John is stone cold pimpin’!

• Remember that dying spy satellite filled with toxic fuel that was endangering the earth? WELL, WE BLEW THE SHIT OUT OF IT. Yeeee-HAW!

• Obama has won the