Today, at 10:00am, mayoral candidate Sho Dozono sponsored a voter registration event at the Waterfront Park Amphitheater. The event, billed as nonpartisan, kicked off with a Native American drummer jam session, which was pretty much awesome.

Untitled from newsintern on Vimeo.

Sho wanted to:

encourage and engage scores of unregistered voters to register and to get committments from hundreds of voters who didn’t participate in previous primaries to vote May 20 to show that diverse communities DO count.

Because of your goddamn Portland weather, the event was moved across the street to the entryway of the World Trade Center building. There were around 10 speakers, lasting about 45 minutes. Afterward, Sho invited the group of 75 or so to march to the Japanese American Historical Plaza along the Naito Parkway.

The crowd, filled mostly with enthusiastic Sho supporters, was in good spirits despite the soggy weather.

Ah, Emilie Boyles. She was one of the first candidates I interviewed in the 2006 election. She was later tossed out of the public financing program for a whole host of issues, like committing to a lease that extended past the primary, and eventually landed in Montana.

I was wondering what she’s up to, and checked out her site today.

From emilieboyles.com, where she runs a sort of political platfom called “For the Good of America”:

For the Good of America Is Now calling for applications for the position of CAMPAIGN MANAGER.

We are currently recruiting for managers for campaigns within the Cities of Phoenix, AZ; Chicago, IL, and Redding, CA. Applications for the City of Portland position are now closed. Successful applicants will work with a national team of advisors, primarily retired military officers to promote candidate, ( to be identified during the interview process after signing non-disclosure statements) and goals of For the Good of America.

Minimum Requirements:

* Must be within Federal Poverty Guidelines OR
* Current SSI/SSDI/Welfare/TANF/VA/RailRoad disability or retirement beneficiary OR
* Current Recipient of long-term disability insurance from private insurer
* OR Stay-at-home parent with no outside income for five or more years
* US Citizen
* Resident of the City in which you are applying
* Able to work comfortably with US Military Personell and Law Enforcement Officers
* Able to work comfortably with all major political parties
* Must have effective written and oral communication skills
* Preference given to former military personell.

Resumes and letters of interest can be emailed to info@emilieboyles.com.

The bold is mine. Has she hired a minion to get involved in politics in Portland?

In response to this week’s question about renter’s rights, I got this note from mayoral candidate Jim Lee in regards to the by-all-accounts unfounded IRS complaint against Charles Lewis—which led to not-so-veiled accusations that Amanda Fritz was behind it, both from Lewis and from folks at Jack Bogdanski’s blog. Fritz and her campaign staff have firmly denied the charge. But Jack even mused about collecting funds to submit Fritz to a lie detector.

Lee writes, in part:

I have been disturbed by the charge Charles Lewis made against Amanda, but would let the matter ride if it were not for the vulgarity of Jack Bogdanovich in amplifying it beyond all reason. Would you consider publishing the attached instead of a direct answer to your question? It is important to nip tactics like that in the bud…

Bogdanovich easily could do to me what he did to Amanda… So I am trying to preempt his vituperation as well…

P. S. Landlord-tenant relations are governed by state law. Unfortunately there is very little the City can do about it.

He used the word “vituperation.” How could I refuse?

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

Charles Lewis probably contravened the law of libel by imputing that a routine inquiry to the City’s election office by an opponent was congruent with an attack upon the tax-exempt status of his foundation. That action set off a wholly unnecessary and very distasteful flap by a popular blogger, which could have seriously compromised the good name of his target, a well known political candidate.

Let’s keep our acts clean, people! Here is a brief guide to legal aspects of this sorry episode.

The rest is after the cut!

Libel law apples to everyone. To “publish” in this sense means to convey any defamatory matter to a third party. The conveyance can be the front page of the New York Times, Jack Bog’s Blog, or a private letter from me to you about someone else.

Charles has only one absolute defense against a charge of libel: he must be able to prove his comments true. Never did he attempt to do so; he is on shaky ground.

But his target is a “public figure,” a kind of person about whom certain statements can be “privileged,” and so not subject to libel actions. In the past Charles might have claimed that his charge was not “malicious,” but courts now are tending to replace that word with “negligent.” Charles should have demonstrated a strong connection between his opponent and the complaint to tax authorities before making his accusation; now he is on quicksand.

Jack Bogdanovich took Charles’s unproven and negligent thesis, broadcast it on his blog, then published further unproven and negligent accusations against Charles’s opponent by himself and many others. Evidently neither Bogdanovich nor his commentors checked Charles’s charges: one blatantly scurrilous comment followed hard upon another; some commentors--I and the target among others--tried to stem the tide, but to no avail. The
target’s strong and final denial was characterized by Bogdanovich as, “...tantamount to a confession.”

At that point I told him to shut up and read a good book on libel. Then I axed his site from my browser.

It is impossible to stop this sort of thing once it gets rolling: Charles Lewis never should have made his accusation; Jack Bogdanovich never should have promulgated it. Probably both infringed the law; worse, both seriously denigrated our political process.

But over and above questions of libel is a simple mind-boggling fact: Jack Bogdanovich is a law professor! He is bound not only by the law of libel but by the code of ethics of the Oregon State Bar. Talk about negligence! Moreover, he endangered the fine reputation of his employer, a vital legal resource to our state.

Shape up, Jack and Charles. You are not winning any votes.

Fourth verse, same as the first:

It seems that due to the current mortgage meltdown and the recession we are currently in, all of the major property management companies have decided to raise their rates in some cases up to 25 percent in non-hip areas. Most of the statues of Tenant’s rights are geared towards property owners, not renters. Leases are not worth the paper they are printed on: I have known many people who are given the 72 hours to vacate notice letter for the most shallow of reasons, but God forbid the tenant wants to walk away as management companies have no problem sticking the ex-renter with charges that are legal, but in bad faith. I.e., you have lived somewhere for 5 years without any work being done on the property, yet the ex-tenant will be billed accordingly for the work that is needed, even though the “damages” are just a part of normal wear and tear.

Is there anything the candidates are thinking of that can help tenants avoid astronomical rent hikes and find more ways to balance out the power of property owners? I am not talking about low-income housing either (which i feel is a separate issue), but working-class citizens that are not seeing their wages get any higher suddenly getting sticker shock when their rent agreements are up for renewal. In all honesty, due to my last rent hike, I am not supporting any property-tax levy because I
know this will give my management company the power to disproportionately increase my rent again beyond the true cost of the tax so they can pocket more money. People are squeezed as much as they can be and this would be will just lower the standard of living to a high degree. I love this town, but it seems that the citizens who are not broke, nor own homes do not really have anyone looking out for them.

I wish to remain anonymous because I am afraid of retaliation.

Remember, Slav is out now. And hopefully we’ll get the two newest candidates into the mix next week. Technically, James B. Lee was first up this week, but he submitted a ‘substitute’ answer that’s off topic—I’ll post it separately.

So that brings us to:

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

In order to succeed in life, people need stable and affordable housing. I think that part of what you are suggesting here could be around rent control. Here are some thoughts:

Like many policies that affect housing availability and tenant rights, rent control is something that would need to happen through an act in the state legislature and, given the current climate, is quite an uphill battle;
As a general rule, rental market forces are much stronger than the affordable housing tools that local government can control. However, local policy can help shape those markets and affect some change;
Places much larger than Portland have seen other issues develop around their rent-controlled units, so I feel it’s an area that deserves a lot of thoughtful discussion;
None of the above should deter the ongoing advocacy of local & state laws that adequately protect tenants while encouraging thoughtful investment in our inevitable growth.

The local solutions that we have to help in the situation you describe are numerous. We must continue to increase the amount of permanently affordable, non-profit sponsored rental units. In this way, we can participate in the market by increasing supply. I have been a continuous advocate for increasing affordable choices for our citizens and I’m proud to have received recognition by the Community Development Network for being a vocal advocate of dedicating 30% of Urban Renewal Dollars to address the need for affordable rental and ownership opportunities throughout our Urban Renewal Areas.

Beyond increasing supply, Portland can do a much better job ensuring that tenants understand their rights under the law. Additionally (and something that may be very helpful to the person that asked this question) organizations like the Community Alliance of Tenants (CAT) serve to educate tenants and provide grassroots advocacy. I pledge to continue to support the work of these organizations through funding and collaboration as well as get the word out about their existence.

While I don’t think rent control is in the early horizon, there is achievable progress to be made at the state level. I will personally join the rest of The Oregon Housing Alliance in pursuing three important goals in the 2009 session: 1) enact the document recording fee that will generate dedicated revenue for affordable housing preservation and creation 2) lift the prohibition for local inclusionary zoning policies that can require a percentage of all new housing development to include permanently affordable units and 3) allow cities to use some urban renewal funds for affordable housing outside of Urban Renewal Area boundaries.

Beyond housing solutions, we must continually develop the capacity of our workforce through economic development strategies, trainings and educational opportunities so that people of all income levels are able to rent and live in our city.

-Sam

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

First of all, I want to express how much I appreciate the writer's desire to stay anonymous. I'm a renter myself, and I've always had a little voice at the back of my head, asking what might happen if this campaign of mine ever got back to my landlord. What if he decided to respond with another rent hike that I can't afford? Or what if he just decided to flat out evict me? The martyrdom points would be awesome; but finding another place inside the city that I can afford? Not so much.

Having said that, I'm disappointed that--despite he's/her comprehensive understanding of the situation--the writer's final question is, "How can we make this fucked up system suck just a little less?". Let me be clear; this system--people owning property they're not actually using, and then charging others to use it--isn't a fundamental part of the human experience. Left to their own devices, people would never agree to this. No, this is an arbitrary system, forced on people by the government. It is a system that makes rich richer, while exploiting the working class. Instead of asking the candidates how they can make this system suck a little less, he/she should be asking what they can to to bring it crashing down to the ground.

So, what will I do as mayor? I will use the power of eminent domain to seize properties from their so called owners, and sell them back to the people who are actually living and working in them. This system will not only help to eliminate the suffering of the working class, but also to drive out the moneyed scum who have been using this government-sanctioned exploitation to fund their own over priced lifestyles.

I can assure you; I am the only mayoral candidate who's going to be offering up a proposal like this.

Sho Dozono
Position sought: Mayor
Website: shoformayor.com
Public financing status: Awaiting final certification

The answer begins with electing a mayor who will serve as a tireless advocate for the middle class homeowner and renter. As a civic activist, I have forged strong ties with the working men and women from various Portland neighborhoods. As Mayor, I will encourage developers to build affordable homes for families throughout the city. As Mayor, I will ensure that city agencies are accountable to all of the residents of the city. Without affordable housing, and accountable city agencies, the concerns of the reader will only get worse. We need a Mayor who is committed to tenants' rights, to affordable housing, to fiscal accountability in city government, and to building communities in which residents and neighborhoods prosper.

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

See this post

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.

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

Did not respond by deadline.

I spotted this on the back of a bus yesterday:

Sweet! Portland’s bike boxes—a space for cyclists to wait at the light in front of auto traffic—are one step closer to reality. They’ll be installed at a handful of the city’s most dangerous intersections for cyclists, as soon as the materials arrive (I hear the paint, or whatever high tech goo they use to mark the pavement, is on order) and the weather’s right.

Live from a sold out Rose Garden, as the Portland Trail Blazers take on the Los Angeles Lakers. The Lakers have won ten in a row, but they have yet to win a game here in Portland since 2005.

Wow, do you even remember 2005?
Here’s a little time capsule from way back when: George W. Bush was our president, our nation was involved in a pair of endless wars, our economy sucked, and Kobe Bryant was the best player in the NBA. I know, total time warp, right?

Things were just different back then.

Pre-Game:
Good News: Brandon Roy (ankle) is supposed to return to the Blazer's lineup tonight, his first game back in almost a week.
Bad News: They are playing the Lakers.
Good News: James Jones (knee) is returning as well, giving the team the outside shooting presence they so desperately need.
Bad News: They are still playing the Lakers.
Good News: But the Lakers never do well here in Portland. They haven't won a game in the Rose Garden in years.
Bad News: It's still the fucking Lakers! Kobe Bryant, ever heard of him? Remember when he scored like 65 points against the Blazers, slept with Paul Allen's girlfriend, and poured a bag of sugar in the gas tank of Steve Blake's mom's Astro Van? Asshole.
Good News: Stop yelling at me, me. Besides, that game was in Los Angeles, and Ms. Blake's Astro Van had, like, 200,000 miles on it. Dickhole.
Bad News: I hate you.
Good News: I hate you more.

Woah, this is what happens when live blogging interferes with me taking my meds.

First Quarter:
12:00 - I hate the Lakers. That is just a warning for the possible slanderous comments I am about to make. I know, normally my sports coverage is fair and balanced (much like Fox News' political coverage), but tonight I might skew things towards the Blazers, just a wee bit.

11:43 - Kobe Bryant steals the ball and scores. He also kicks a kitten, suffocates an orphan and votes for McCain. See? I'm biased. 2-0 Jerks Lakers.

8:46 - KobeCall™. That is when an opposing player (Martell Webster, in this case) comes too close to precious Kobe anytime during the game. Foul on Webster. Also, since this place is crawling with Lakers fans, I hate to make a blanket statement, but all Lakers fans are dicks. Every single one of them. 8-5 Lakers.

5:51 - Gosh, Ezra. You sure were harsh with that "all Lakers fans are dicks" comment. Oh yeah? You want proof? Here is your proof. Check and mate. 15-10 Lakers.

4:34 - A crippled Brandon Roy torches Kobe for a soft layup (which was goaltended, but whatever) and Steve Blake follows with a three from the corner. Not bad. 19-18 Los Angeles.

3:37 - Anthony Kiedis sighting. Ugh. Let's hope he leaves town when the Lakers leave. And yeah, I know his dad lives here. But if the father of the fat dude from Smashmouth lived here, I wouldn't hate them any less. Ooooh, James Jones is in the game. Welcome back JJ. 21-19 Lakers.

1:51 - KobeCall™ II. Roy got too close to Kobe and the referee, most likely the one getting the autograph, had to blow his whistle. 26-19 Lakers.

Second Quarter:
12:00 - While it might not be as important as we all want this game to be, the atmosphere here at the Rose Garden is electric. Hating Kobe, and the Lakers, is something everyone can get behind. 32-27 Lakers.

10:30 - Kobe makes a pretty highlight. Granted, to me he's Hitler in hightops, but that shit was pretty. 37-31 Lakers.

9:33 - Oh shit! Przybilla and Kobe go at it. Kobe jaws. Joel jaws. Chests are bumped. Double technical on each. Wow. 39-37 Lakers.

8:58 - Anthony Kiedis has the ball. It just bounced to him in the crowd. Weird. Someone give that ball a Hep C vaccine. I'm kidding! Pleasesdon'tsue. 41-37 Lakers.

7:00 - Aldridge with a little finger roll layup and the mighty Purple and Yellow are only leading by one. I'm waiting for Przybilla to come back into the game. I have a feeling he isn't done with Kobe. 46-45 Los Angeles.

4:17 - KobeCall™ III. He double dribbles, but alas, no call. Meanwhile, Roy, without the referees assistance, slices the lane and scores on a great layup. 52-52 tie.

2:29 - BLAKE FOR THREE! Portland has taken the lead. Blake just traded threes with Kobe, but now he did the superstar one better. 60-57 Blazers.

0:13 - Man, it feels like a playoff game. Too bad come playoff time I'll be watching the games on TV, as will the Blazers. Their televisions will just be bigger than mine. But tonight sure feels special. 64-59 Blazers, with a chance to get more. This is, hands down, the best half the team has played in quite awhile.

Third Quarter:
10:19 - Sloppy start of the third for everyone. And I do mean everyone. The weird prize blimp is stuck in the rafters. 66-63 Blazers.

7:08 - Webster for three! Boom. Damn, this game rules. 74-71 Blazers.

6:08 - Steve Blake hurls himself in front of a driving Kobe, and... foul on Kobe?!? Wow. What's next? A good record from Anthony Kiedis? Ha, yeah, that'll be the day. 76-74 Blazers.

4:31 - Aldridge with a one-handed dunk, which—let me check my rule book—is good for two points. Zen master Phil Jackson is not cool with that. Harshed his mellow enough for him to call a time out. 78-74 PDX.

2:41 - Travis Outlaw drains a bucket over Luke Walton. He adds, "Your dad is a stinking hippie." 80-78 Blazers.

1:35 - Nice little turnaround for the home team. The Vanilla Gorilla with a finesse tip-in (a rarity for the clunky center), and then Outlaw nails a 18-footer. 84-78 Portland.

0:00 - Ok, that sucked. Kobe dunked. Kobe stole the ball. Kobe hit a three. All of that happened in a matter of seconds. Woah. 87-86 Lakers. Did I mention I hate the Lakers?

Fourth Quarter:
11:38 - I usually spend these games cursing God for creating Jarrett Jack, but tonight the bald fellow is on fire. 14 points and 8 assists so far. Wow. 88-87 PDX. Kobe is on the bench, for now...

9:17 - James Jones for a HUGE three. He was a few feet behind the line. That should be four points. 95-90 Blazers, their biggest lead of the game.

7:26 - Jordan Farmar Superstar with a flop, and the Lakers crawl right back (without Sir Kobe). 96-95 PDX.

5:47 - Chalupa points, and earlier than usual. Too bad the Lakers seem more motivated now than ever. And Kobe, he's back. 100-100 tie.

5:22 - OH FUCKING SHIT. Aldridge just out-Kobed Kobe and the Lakers. He had a wicked one-handed put back dunk. That was ridiculous. 102-100 Blazers.

2:53 - Roy and Kobe go BOOM and collide. Talent spills out everywhere. Charisma too, but just from Roy. 107-107, tie. The Blazers haven't played like this in a long time, even during their December win streak they hardly played with the passion they are showing tonight. A win tonight could go a long way. Not just this season, but beyond. A loss? Well, that might be very bad.

2:35 - Pau Gasol pokes Aldridge in the eye. The refs give him a delicious chocolate bar. 109-107 Blazers

1:51 - Aldridge on the line, poked eye and all, with a chance to put some space in this Blazers lead. Hits the first. Hits the second. 113-107 Blazers.

0:48 - Geez, this game is just screaming by. Usually the last few minutes take forever, but not tonight. The Lakers have the ball, but Portland still leads 113-107. This is damn exciting.

0:39 - Kobe clanks a three. Blazers get the ball, and Roy is fouled. Hits number one. Hits number two. 115-107 Blazers. This might be it.

0:18 - Kobe fouls Jack, and ladies and gents, the Blazers are going to win this basketball game! No more 10 game winning streak for the Lakers. Wow, this feels great. A Lakers loss and a sad Anthony Kiedis? What could be better? 117-107 Blazers.

0:00 - It's all done. 119-111 Blazers. Well done Portland.

You’ve got until midnight tonight to download a free pdf of Charles Bock’s much buzzed-about Beautiful Children. I haven’t read Bock’s chronicle of the lives of Vegas street kids, and didn’t catch his reading at Powell’s earlier this month, but I hear good things.

This week I wrote a news story about former state Rep Kevin Mannix’s bonkers ballot measure that would send crack dealers, identity thieves, and felony property criminals to jail for at least three years on a first conviction—without the option of drug treatment.

The measure would also remove judicial discretion on sentencing. At the moment, if someone agrees to plead guilty, their lawyer gets to argue with the DAs in front of a judge over the appropriate sentence, instead of going to trial. A couple of weeks ago, I went to what’s called “drug call”—the Friday afternoon session at the Multnomah County Courthouse where defendants decide which way to plead.

In theory, if Mannix’s measure passes, plenty more defendants will plead not guilty because the mandatory 3-year sentence for their crimes means they’ll have nothing to lose by going to trial. That could mean the court system grinding to a halt.

As for “crack taxis”: I’ve been unable to find the expression anywhere on Google, which means I’m hereby claiming it for the Mercury. But a crack taxi, it turns out, is a stolen car, sold on by a crack addict to pay for the drugs. Often the purchaser of a crack taxi will know where it came from, but occasionally, such a vehicle will end up in the hands of somebody who isn’t aware of its origins. Like the bloke in this advert:
1989 CAMRY: The US’s most stolen car, according to insurers…

I first learned about crack taxis from public defender Joe Hagedorn, who gave me the tour of drug call. More after the jump.

Hagedorn, who has been an attorney for nine and a half years, is the supervising attorney in charge of felony property cases for Metropolitan Public Defender. He is also a self-confessed sentencing wonk:
HAGEDORN: Knows Oregon's sentencing law inside out...

Hagedorn and I showed up in Judge Jerry B.Hodson's court on Friday afternoon, February 15. The back three benches of the courtroom are laid out like a Greek theater around the Judge's table, and they were all full, with 30 or so reasonably hardened-looking people. Most were between 20 and 40, and I'd say around 20 per cent were African American—higher than Portland's census average. Many of the defendants were what Hagedorn described as "frequent fliers."

At the front of the room, a line of criminal defenders was waiting to talk in front of the Judge, and a wipe board sat next to them. On it was a tally of those who had agreed to plead guilty and move to sentencing negotiations, and a tally of those who wanted to go to trial. Roughly 20 people wanted to plead guilty. 3 were going to trial.

Before we'd arrived, Hagedorn had shown me his sentencing book. It's a complex grid showing all the different sentences someone can get based on their past convictions and a whole host of mitigating factors. Right now, someone found guilty of four identity thefts gets 13 months in prison, although judges are open to negotiation. If a defendant did the crime because they are addicted to drugs, for example, judges will often give a shorter sentence and combine it with drug treatment.

Under Mannix's measure, someone found guilty of identity theft for the first time would get 3 years. There would be no judicial discretion over sentencing, and the person would not be given drug treatment.

"It's crazy," says Hagedorn. "The increased cost of incarceration would be dramatic."

Back to the courtroom: The environment was pretty intense. All the defendants stayed quiet, shifting occasionally on the benches. The defense lawyers, meanwhile, bantered back and forth. This is their office—they act more relaxed. From a door in the back corner of the courtroom came occasional loud shouting every four or five minutes. Hagedorn showed me in.

Inside, district attorneys were lined up on one side of a bench. On the other, criminal defenders were sitting with all their case files. The atmosphere was informal and cheekily adversarial, although as I came in, people calmed down. A couple of people cracked wise, someone complemented Hagedorn on his new haircut. He said "thanks." This is where the negotiation over cases happens, and it's all done off the record. As we were shown out, the shouting started back up again, reasonably quickly. It was chaotic and yet, very important. I couldn't help thinking I'd enjoy it.

"When you've been a defense attorney for a while you start to believe that everyone has used meth at some point," said Hagedorn, when I asked him how many felony property crimes are connected with drug addiction. "Mannix seems to think that people don't commit crimes because of drug addiction, but that's absolutely incorrect.

Generally, a client might go to trial because the defender believes they have a good chance of beating the case.

"I had a case recently where the officer didn't have permission to search my client," says Hagedorn. "So we went to trial."

Police officers are always pushing the line of what's legal to make a case, says Hagedorn, although he's used to losing in court.

"Jurors just hate property crime, especially identity theft," he says. "After all, we used to hang horse thieves in this country. And it's the same with meth. People don't like drug dealers either."

Hagedorn he says he believes 100% in the integrity of every single one of his clients.

"You have to. Even though we've been called public pretenders," he says.

Sometimes Hagedorn works only to get his clients off on a lesser charge. An officer, for example, may bust someone with a large quantity of drugs and lots of small plastic bags, and try to charge them with delivery of a controlled substance. But under the law, there's no proof. The person can argue they were only carrying the bags for another reason, and the cops have to prove the person was selling by observing a hand-to-hand. The legal term for such a defense is a "Boyd Delivery."

Asked whether there's racial profiling going on, Hagedorn is sure. He says the cops do pull more black people over in Portland. "I don't know what the solution is, but I think the facts show that," he says.

"Also, I think people really don't know their rights," he continues. "The first contact a lot of these people are going to have with a police officer, they don't know what to say. They should just shut up and ask for a layer, because a lot of police officers act like they want to be friends, say they're going to help the suspect out, and they can be very aggressive about that, about pulling people over and getting consent to search, for example."

Hagedorn says he would like to see all conversations between officers and suspects recorded, as currently happens in Minnesota. He thinks that would remove the he said-she said ambiguity that can sometimes emerge when officers say a suspect "admitted something" to them before coming to trial.

He also admits being a criminal defender is a stressful job.

"But you learn to handle it," he says. "And really, the stress is all on the district attorneys. It's their job, once they've decided to prosecute a case, to win."

Thanks to Joe for showing me around.

We’ve got two new mayoral candidates, both of whom have jumped in within the past two weeks.

Christopher Rich of SW Portland lists himself as an “Entrepreneur in Advertising-Marketing/Commercial Property Mngmt.”

He’s been doing that since 1995, according to his filing form. Before that, he writes that he was a journeyman carpenter, millwright, boatwright, inorganic waste engineer, and a consultant. He went to high school in Renton, Washington, and has attended Chemeketa Community College.

I think it’s safe to say Rich is among the more eclectic of candidates in this non-partisan race. He wants to kill the day laborer center, but make it easier to get medical marijuana. From his myspace page, here are bits of his mayoral platform:

Eliminate plans to construct a facility to harbor the illegal occupants of this city. We have a strong day labor industry in Portland for lawful workers. I would divert the estimated $250,000.00 to Portland public schools, starting with our schools in NE to begin getting them up to par with the rest of the district.

Place stylishly uniformed crosswalk guards at W. Burnside St. and Park Ave. during daytime hours for safe passage of pedestrians between the North and South Park blocks.

I will support and defend a lawful business’ right to work in the city free from attack from unlawful protests by groups or individuals.

I will hold cyclists responsible for their own safety. Portland is already bicycle friendly with many miles of bike lanes. Our major roads are designed for automobiles and paid for by motorists. I will yield to them that basic courtesy and work from there on the issues and solutions on both sides.

Create a medical marijuana dispensary for lawful patients and caregivers. The law allows patients to grow, possess and consume cannabis, however, it doesn’t specify how a patient can obtain cannabis if they cannot grow or find a suitable grower for their needs. The end result is that legal patients have to break the law buying marijuana, something they can legally possess. A dispensary will create a safe option for these people where one isn’t available. The program will pay for itself just as the State program does.

Patricia Stewart, of NE Portland, says she’ll be spending less than $300 in her bid for mayor. She’s currently collecting signatures to get on the ballot.

Stewart is an American Red Cross Instructor, a state test examiner (not sure what kind of tests), and a Multnomah County Consumer Advocate for mental health. She’s also a secretary at “Wall & Colby.”

Her educational background shows schools in New Jersey, before heading to the University of Oregon to study Psychology and Sociology. She’s also served on the Women’s Commission in Eugene, and the Commission on the Rights of Minorities, also in Eugene. No website for her…

These are pictures from the Star Trek: The Next Generation “How to Host a Mystery” party that Britta hosted at her apartment on April 28th, 2002…

(FYI: My Ensign Ro uniform is “vintage” from 1991, but all the other uniform shirts, plus Guinan’s hat, were all made by me for this party for less than $20…I couldn’t let my guests not look official just because they didn’t own uniforms! :)

Who Stole the Orb of Knowledge?

It is Stardate 47729.75 aboard the starship USS Enterprise 1701-D. Eight members of an Enterprise Away Team have returned from the remote planet Delphi 4 with a remarkable discovery - the legendary Orb of Knowledge. At a celebration banquet, excitement turns to dismay when the Orb is stolen and the Away Team must decide who amongst them has committed the crime.

MOTHERFUCKIN’ PARTAY!

WHO WANTS SOME JELLO SHOTS YO!

GEORDI SCANS FOR CARBOHYDRATES! (SCANS FOR HIGH SELF ESTEEM ARE NEGATIVE!)

OMG! RIKER BROUGHT THAT GIRLFRIEND HE WON’T EVER STOP BRAGGING ABOUT!

And it doesn’t stop.

Media Bistro’s Unbeige blog reports that the cover of the Olsen Twins’ forthcoming coffee-table book, Influence, will be designed by Rodrigo Corral. Corral has designed some really beautiful books, including a bunch of covers for local boy Chuck Palahniuk—here’s the one for Rant:

I really didn’t care for Rant, but haven’t been able to get rid of my copy, just ‘cause it’s so darn pretty.

The quote from Penguin’s press release about Mary Kate and Ashley’s book:

Influence introduces readers to respected artists, seasoned designers, and others who have influenced Mary-Kate Olsen and Ashley Olsen over the past decade. The book will feature influential figures including; Christian Louboutin, Lauren Hutton, Bob Colacello, Terry Richardson, Jack Pierson, and Robert Lee Morris. A coffee table book, Influence includes exclusive photographs of Ashley and Mary-Kate from world renowned photographer Rankin, and a wide variety of other never-before-seen materials and interviews from Mary-Kate and Ashley’s personal collections. This unique book is edited by fashion and arts writer Derek Blasberg and designed by eminent book designer Rodrigo Corral.

I just spent 20 minutes on the Full House wikipedia page. I learned a lot. I don’t remember Uncle Jesse’s catchphrase being “Have mercy!” A sentence I really like is, “Danny is best known for his obsession with hugging and cleanliness.” And then there’s this tidbit: “Mary-Kate and Ashley Olsen nearly left the show after the first season because their real-life mother was concerned about them missing out on having a “normal” childhood. After a raise from the producers, she let them stay on.”

Good call, Mom.

In a recent nationwide survey studying the top leisure activities of cranky hipsters, “being sick of Wes Anderson” handily surpassed “pretending to like roller derby,” “complaining about Facebook,” and “(still) bemoaning the loss of Arrested Development to anyone who’ll listen.” No doubt survey results were affected, in large part, by The Darjeeling Limited, Anderson’s latest, which met with largely tepid response when it came out last fall—though at least part of the blame could be laid at the feet of The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou, which also got a lot of flack and made a lot of people grumpy, and if you’re really going to get hoity-toity about it, there were hints of this—we should have seen it coming—as far back as The Royal Tenenbaums, which angered some people, as far as scientists can tell, simply because it wasn’t Rushmore.

Which is too bad, because as easy as it apparently is to hate on Anderson (“His sets are too pretty!” “His soundtracks are too good!”), The Darjeeling Limited is pretty damn impressive, perhaps more so on a second viewing that on the first. I liked Darjeeling well enough when I saw it in theaters, but I didn’t love it until I saw it on DVD, which works out alright, since the DVD came out on Tuesday.

The thing about Darjeeling, and maybe Anderson’s films in general, is this: Instead of trying to make one forget about the unavoidable artificiality of cinema, Anderson pretty much revels in it, making films that’re so intensely detailed and so intentionally cinematic that it’s impossible to ever forget you’re watching a movie. One way of looking at narrative film as an art form is to think of it as something transcendent--something that distracts you from your actual existence, transporting you wholly into a different, false world for an hour and a half. Another way to look at is a more clinical and removed, I guess: That by examining how film works and how audiences interact with it, filmmakers can create something that’s less convincing as an illusion, but ideally something that, while it's obviously fake, nevertheless deals with real emotions and identifiable characters.

Anderson’s firmly in the latter camp, there, which has earned him no small amount of shit, with the criticism steadily increasing with each film that his physical details are too overwhelming, his camera placement too distracting, his music too involved. All of these things occasionally take precedence over the story and the characters, Anderson’s critics insist, and therefore take away something from the act of watching his films. In some ways, they’re right--Anderson’s films have grown increasingly enamored with background detail, just as his emotional tone has grown increasingly dependent on his soundtrack choices. These things would be serious issues if you’re the type of filmgoer who insists on being transported into an artificial world with a minimum of real-world interruptions, or can't abide the notion of constantly being reminded of what Anderson's doing and how he's doing it. But for those willing to take a step back and observe Anderson’s works as carefully-tuned, intentionally beautiful creations, it’s worth noting that films like Darjeeling and Life Aquatic still retain an astonishing amount of emotional vigor. It's not so much about whether or not the soundtrack is too prominent or the set dressings too distracting; it's about how all of those things combine with good performances and storytelling to create films that don't feel like anything else out there. They're works of artifice, yes, but after rewatching Darjeeling, I'm tempted to say that just because something's intentionally, unforgettably artificial, that doesn't make it any less affecting or gorgeous.

The awkward, funny, and heartfelt Darjeeling's also interesting because of its structure, or lack thereof. The story of three brothers on an exotic "spiritual journey" is rambling and meandering (just like actual journeys usually are), and by the time the plot really starts kicking in, the movie's half over--and even then, plot elements start up and fade out, weave in and around and disappear, pop up without warning. The tone of the whole thing is somewhat detached--whether it's with the infinitely detailed props or the carefully executed slow-motion tracking shots or the self-conscious zooms--but it's always sympathetic to the characters and their states. It's an impressive, almost in-your-face style of filmmaking, but it all feels in service to the characters and the emotions. It works.

Almost all of Anderson's previous films are available via the Criterion Collection (the only one that isn't is Bottle Rocket, and there's a Criterion version of that coming out at some point), which makes it a shame that this release, by way of Fox Home Entertainment, is sadly lacking in the things that make Criterion's discs so awesome. Included with the film is Anderson's prequel short to Darjeeling, Hotel Chevalier (which, perhaps due to its length and/or focus, seems, in a few ways, to be a better film than Darjeeling), which can be watched either in front of the feature or separately. Also included is a 20-minute featurette, "The Darjeeling Limited Walking Tour," which is a scattershot, vague, fly-on-the-wall sort of mini-doc looking at the chaotic process of filmmaking in India and on a cramped, moving train. Unsurprisingly, production designer Mark Friedberg is the most prominently featured member of the cast and crew, though since the featurette doesn't deal exclusively with production design, it's not like we get a whole lot of insight into that, either. It's just half-assed, and the disc's failings grow even more obvious when compared with Anderson's exhaustive, well-rounded Criterion releases of Rushmore, Tenenbaums, and Life Aquatic.

The only other "special features" on here are the film's theatrical trailer and some other Fox Home Entertainment trailers (most notably a god-awful trailer for the ill-advised, long-delayed The Onion Movie, which looks like it's finally being shoveled onto DVD).

It kind of blows. This is a film that's well worth watching a second time, or more--there's a lot more going on here, in terms of both symbolism and characterization, than is evident with just a single viewing. But this DVD release feels lazy and minimal, almost intentionally so--so in other words, I'd be really surprised if this isn't just the first release of the film on DVD, with a more expansive, more worthwhile, and more expensive re-release already in the works. Which sucks for this release, but I suppose is good overall: The film deserves a lot more, and considering that there's obviously some demand for such things, hopefully there'll be a better release of this film down the line, and hopefully it'll be by Criterion.

Check out this infectiously danceable new single from Gnarls Barkley entitled “Run”—which also happens to have a great video cameo from your heartthrob and mine, Justin Timberlake! All together now… EEEEEEE!
Even better, Timberlake plays the host of a Kid ‘n Play era dance show, which features some of the sweetest moves and bounciest booty I’ve seen since… well… the Kid ‘n Play era!

More booty bouncin’ over at End Hits!

To celebrate United Artists’ 90th anniversary, it looks like the studio’s teamed up with ye olde Laurelhurst (2735 E Burnside) to show a bunch of classic UA and MGM films over the next few months. This has a very strong potential for awesomeness.

All of these* are going to be amazing to see on the big screen (well, as big as the screens are at the Laurelhurst, anyway), and I’m fucking there for The Great Escape, The Good, The Bad & The Ugly, and The Magnificent Seven. Just try to keep me away. You will fail.

March 14-20: West Side Story
March 20-27: Judgment at Nuremberg
March 28-April 3: The Manchurian Candidate
April 4-10: The Great Escape
April 11-17: The Good, The Bad & The Ugly
April 18-24: The Magnificent Seven
April 25-May 1: Raging Bull
May 2-8: Some Like It Hot
May 9-15: The Apartment
May 16-22: In the Heat of the Night

*Yes, even West Side Story. I GUESS.

Like a trainwreck you can’t help but watch, America’s Next Top Model soldiers on. Wanna be on it? Here’s your shot:

Americas Next Top Model Open Casting Call

Portland, Oregon — Jantzen Beach SuperCenter will be the site for an open casting call for America’s Next Top Model cycle 11, at Jantzen BeachSuperCenter on Saturday March 8, 2008 from 9:00am to 1:00pm with the local CW affiliate.

Women between the ages of 18 and 27 who are over 5’ 7” tall are encouraged to take part in the America’s Next Top Model open audition. Applicants must complete a pre-screening process before auditioning in front of the camera. After passing the prescreening process, eligible top model hopefuls will appear in front of the camera for a taped audition. Tapes are then sent to a casting team in Burbank, California for further consideration. Complete eligibility requirements and applications are available at www.jantzenbeachsupercenter.com

If you want some insider info on what it’s like to audition for this show, check out our article about it here.

In a move sure to have the city hopping mad, I’ve decided to post this picture of graffiti on the Federal Building in San Fransisco, posted on SFIST yesterday, and muse on how amusing it would be to see something similar here in Portland. When are those pissoirs going to get here, anyways?
THE SIDEWALK: It’s where you go when you know…city bureaucrats are taking too long to build you a real toilet…

Hey, it’s leap year day! Neato. Nolita thinks that’s as good a reason as any to offer 20% off the entire store all day today. That includes incoming new merch from favorite streetwear lines like Mike & Chris, who consistently threaten to take over my wardrobe completely.

And there’s more Nolita news: they finally have a blog! Congratulations, folks, and welcome to the 21st Century. Now you can keep track of their arrivals, sales, things they’re currently fond of, and more.

Also! They will soon be carrying maternity denim. As soon as April, start looking for options from lines like Seven, Rock & Republic, and Citizens of Humanity, all you hipster preggy folks.

Our statistics show that most Mercury readers make more money than most Mercury writers, so check out M.O.D. for daily updated suggestions on how to offload some of that do-re-mi, moneybags.

Local band A Weather have a new album coming out next Tuesday, and you can check out an interview they did with Dave Allen right here. You’ll also hear “Oh My Stars” and “Spiders, Snakes” from the new album.

The Oregonian’s Old Town blogger Larry Norton went after Sisters of The Road’s Community Organizer, Patrick Nolen, in a post on Wednesday, responding to my article about spending a night on the street with Nolen:

For me, the quintessential issue - who are the homeless? From the article - his ‘guide’ is not and was not. Sorry.

I find little in the article that would convince me that the ‘guide’ was an involuntary homeless person. He seemed to have much going for him - but threw it away.

Norton never names Nolen. He calles him my ‘guide,’ which for me, must qualify as an effort to depersonalize Patrick. He does, of course, say some wise, wise things:

I am a supporter of the Portland Mercury, especially Matt Davis…Look - I like the reporter and the Mercury. Much good works come the Mercury.

But the rest requires a response. Firstly Larry I’m glad you read the piece and felt moved to start a discussion on it. But if 1200 words is enough for you to pass judgment on somebody’s worthiness as a human being, you’re less clever than I thought. You also talk about “the homeless” in the US. To many homeless people, that is like referring to them en masse as “the blacks.”

I mean what was the purpose of the article - other than to demonstrate that living on the street is difficult? Can anyone deny that?

The purpose of the article was to draw attention to the issue of homelessness by personalizing it. By denying Patrick even so much as his name in your response to the piece, you suggest you’re not interested in his humanity. You’re interested in his “problem.” You seem to be asking: “What’s broken, Patrick? What’s wrong with you?”

In response I’m going to post this video featuring Bill Strickland, who built a center in Pittsburgh for ex-steel workers, single parents and welfare mothers. He talks about the design and architecture of the center, about its entryway with a fountain: “I think that welfare mothers and ex steelworkers and single parents deserve a fountain in their life,” he says. “It sets an attitude and expectation of how you feel about people before you give them a speech.” The talk is accompanied by Herbie Hancock’s piano. Take a valium, watch it, and chill out.

BILL STRICKLAND: “The only thing wrong with poor people is that they don’t have any money…”

What expectations of homeless people do you have, Larry? Give me a call and we can talk about it.

Eight security guards in King County Metro Transit’s downtown tunnel were fired last month after the Sheriff’s Office discovered they had criminal records.

Two of the guards had warrants out for their arrest.

Their records came to light after one guard filed a police report about an incident in which she was a victim.

A deputy investigating her complaint found a warrant for a drug offense, prompting a broader review of all private security officers working for Metro, sheriff’s spokesman Sgt. John Urquhart said.

Good work, Seattle PI.

If you happened to have missed last night’s episode of Lost… well, SHAME. However, it would be cruel to deny you the opportunity to see the new and pretty damn awesome Iron Man trailer that debuted during Lost.

ROLL IT!

City Auditor Gary Blackmer appears to have washed his hands of responsibility for the so-called Independent Police Review.

Mayor Tom Potter has announced on his website this morning that he “will be asking Council to temporarily assign the IPR to the Mayor’s Office in order to step back and take a look at how IPR is working and determine if changes need to occur.”
BLACKMER (center, with beard): Now also absolved from responsibility for police oversight, like his colleague, former IPR Director Leslie Stevens (right, playing “catchy”) who took a job with the police bureau in January…

Super. The news follows a protest at City Hall yesterday over the mayor’s decision to delay a public hearing on a controversial report about the IPR until after March 18, when council will decide on a way forward without hearing public testimony.

“I do not believe the Mayor’s Office is the proper, permanent home for IPR, but it is the most appropriate during this review,” writes Potter, in his statement.

Police oversight activists have been arguing that the mayor should establish an independent office separate from city hall, with its own legal counsel, for IPR, to avoid any apparent conflicts of interest between effective investigation of police complaints, and the city saving money on lawsuit payouts.

Auditor Blackmer has been blustering about his role as IPR boss over recent weeks. Shortly before a consultant’s damning report on IPR came back to council, he told this Mercury reporter: “You’re despicable,” and “Fuck You” after we pushed him for a substantive response to a difficult question.

City Commissioner Randy Leonard stuck up for Blackmer, arguing that the mayor, as police commissioner, was trying to scapegoat Blackmer with the report. It was Leonard who first suggested the mayor take control of IPR. Leonard insists this was his idea, not Blackmer’s.

“It’s clear from Blackmer’s response to the consultant’s report that Blackmer is not the person to be the running the IPR,” says Dan Handelman. “I think he showed at the very least he doesn’t understand what the community wants a citizen review board to do, and at worst he showed contempt for the citizenry.”

In his response to the consultant’s report suggestion that the citizen review board tell the IPR director when to conduct independent investigations, Blackmer wrote on his website: “I was elected to serve the citizens of Portland, not to have my judgment and expertise over-ruled by a committee appointed by council.”

Touchy!

“On the one hand Blackmer is saying the citizens had great judgment putting him in this office, but on the other he is saying he doesn’t trust them to decide when police misconduct needs independent scrutiny,” says Handelman.

*First off, can someone tell me what Laura Bush was doing here yesterday? Seriously, I want to know. (Education and stuff is not an answer).

*Ok so fun facts from yesterday’s NYT article, reporting on a new study by the Pew Center on the States.
*1 out of 99 adults are in jail, the most in our country’s history
*1 out of 36 hispanics are in the slammer
*1 out of 9 black males from 20 to 34 are behind bars

Also, if you’re going to commit a crime, commit the crime in Rhode Island. They spend $43,000 per year on inmates. Yes, the state of Rhode Island pays you more to commit heinous crimes than the NYC Dept of Education pays their first year teachers.

Worst state to get caught? Louisiana, naturally. $13,000/year.

Ok so incarceration rates seem pretty high right? Kinda upsetting, no?

Professor Paul Cassell, ex-federal judge and hardened warriorman, says to calm down and remember that violent crime has dropped 25% from 1987 to 2007.

“While we certainly want to be smart about who we put into prisons,” Professor Cassell said, “it would be a mistake to think that we can release any significant number of prisoners without increasing crime rates. One out of every 100 adults is behind bars because one out of every 100 adults has committed a serious criminal offense.”

I actually agree that if 1 out of 100 adults were committing terribly violent crimes (rape, murder, assault with a firearm, etc), then 1 out of 100 people should be in jail. But I have a sneaking suspicion that a big chunk of those inmates are there for other stuff, like DWIs and drug-related arrests. According to the NYT article, Texas has recently passed legislation aimed at reducing their prison populations; they will increase drug treatment programs and consider earlier release for nonviolent offenders. That’s right people, Texas, that bastion of progressivism, has decided prison rates are unsustainable.

*Ok moving on, Badge showed me this!
Play this game.
Then read this article.
Prove to yourself that you are the irrational fool you always thought you were!

*Today’s strip!
…I think i should be offended, but all it makes me want to do is dress in orange and give myself a big bear hug.

*Dammit, every other month I have to read about how we’re on the brink of another war. Seymour Hersh has gotten pretty worked up about the whole war with Iran thing. Should we be concerned yet? He makes his case in last year’s New Yorker, saying there’s been a major shift in Bush’s approach to the Mideast. Containing Shiite influence (Iran, Hezbollah, Syria) is now number one priority, as opposed to hunting down Sunni insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan. He quotes some anonymous government consultant, calling it a “sea change” shift in American foreign policy. Hersh says there’s been clandestine operations against Hezbollah in Lebanon and other places. He says these operations are being paid for by the Saudis, who have a mutual interest in a weaker Iran. He also says that the Saudis have been more helpful in the Israel-Palestine peace negotiations because the continued conflict emboldens Iran. (Remember how this past year Bush started talking seriously about peace in Israel and Palestine for the first time in his entire presidency? Hersh would argue it’s because of this new shift in strategy).

I agree with the fact that the most dramatic consequence of the Iraq war (other than the unimaginable number of dead Iraqi civilians) has been the empowerment of Iran, which is now unquestionably the regional power. But I doubt the administration is stupid enough (yes I said that seriously) to divert troops and funds away from Iraqi security to fight off Shiite influence in other places. Sure, they’ve been beating the drums about Iran for years, but all out war still seems unlikely. It’s in the interest of both countries to stay out of direct military conflict – America is stretched too thin as it is, and Iranian leaders benefit greatly by our presence next door. I don’t doubt Hersh’s claims that Saudi Arabia, with the approval of the US, is taking out Hezbollah strongholds. But I think that’s as far as it will go, at least for the foreseeable future - America bitching about Iran smuggling weapons into Iraq and Iran bitching about American ships in the Persian Gulf. The most likely situation is a Mideast Cold War. Hersh quotes Martin Indyk, a senior State Department official in the Clinton Administration who also served as Ambassador to Israel, and says that “the Middle East is heading into a serious Sunni-Shiite Cold War,” implying clandestine and indirect military operations but the avoidance of all-out war between any two powers.

See, now don’t we feel better?

Have a nice day!!

Want to know all the shhhhhhhhhh! information about the Stephen Malkmus and the Jicks MySpace secret show?

Well, it turns out that I’m “friends” with this guy named Tom and he told me (and only me, since we’re such close friends) that Malkmus and the Jicks are playing Tuesday March 4th at Satyricon.

Damn.

To get into this all-age (and free) event, read the details after the jump.

End Hits: Still waiting on that Friendster-sponsored Everclear show…

INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO GET INTO THE SHOW

You will need a wristband to get into the show. Writsbands will be available for pick up at Music Millennium's location between 5:00 and 7:00 P.M. on the day of the show.

Music Millennium is at 3158 E Burnside. The telephone number there is (503) 231-8926. They will also have the band's new album, Real Emotional Trash, on sale for $11.99.

Hey, the show is free, so maybe you should buy a copy, right?

ALSO, wristbands will be available at the club at the normal door times. However, THIS SHOW IS FIRST COME FIRST SERVED, so get there early and stay in line.

We’re on the third of the four races, with the same question, on renters’ rights:

It seems that due to the current mortgage meltdown and the recession we are currently in, all of the major property management companies have decided to raise their rates in some cases up to 25 percent in non-hip areas. Most of the statues of Tenant’s rights are geared towards property owners, not renters. Leases are not worth the paper they are printed on: I have known many people who are given the 72 hours to vacate notice letter for the most shallow of reasons, but God forbid the tenant wants to walk away as management companies have no problem sticking the ex-renter with charges that are legal, but in bad faith. I.e., you have lived somewhere for 5 years without any work being done on the property, yet the ex-tenant will be billed accordingly for the work that is needed, even though the “damages” are just a part of normal wear and tear.

Is there anything the candidates are thinking of that can help tenants avoid astronomical rent hikes and find more ways to balance out the power of property owners? I am not talking about low-income housing either (which i feel is a separate issue), but working-class citizens that are not seeing their wages get any higher suddenly getting sticker shock when their rent agreements are up for renewal. In all honesty, due to my last rent hike, I am not supporting any property-tax levy because I
know this will give my management company the power to disproportionately increase my rent again beyond the true cost of the tax so they can pocket more money. People are squeezed as much as they can be and this would be will just lower the standard of living to a high degree. I love this town, but it seems that the citizens who are not broke, nor own homes do not really have anyone looking out for them.

I wish to remain anonymous because I am afraid of retaliation.

John Branam—who has been a landlord—got back to us first:

John Branam
Position sought: Commissioner #1
Website: john4pdx.org
Public financing status: Certified as a publicly financed candidate

As much as we’re all proud of the ways in which Portland continues to do the right things that, in many respects, result in our becoming a sought-after place to live, one clear downside is the rise in the cost of living. People are moving here in droves and while that’s generally positive, it means rents are rising and landlords can get away with being less responsive. Making sure Portlanders at all income levels can have a clean, safe and affordable place to live is essential if we are to hold on to the “Portland” we cherish.

Obviously we are not the first city to encounter this problem. Cities such as New York and San Francisco have long faced these challenges. Those cities have had their successes—and failures—dealing with tenant protections. We need to consider what those cities have done correctly as we move forward.

Without question I think our city council and the appropriate bureaus should explore the strategies and opportunities to make sure our landlords follow the spirit of the law as much as they do the letter. Working to make sure landlords follow the laws and are responsive and reasonable is positive, both in the short and long-term, for all of Portland.

As City Commissioner I look forward to exploring all creative and legal solutions to ensuring renters are protected from unscrupulous landlords. Clear strategies for doing this include, but are not limited to, raising awareness across the city of tenants’ rights, partnering with local non-profits that are adept at addressing these issues, and making sure the city enforces all laws related to protecting tenants.

Chris Smith
Position sought: Commissioner #1
Website: citizensmith.us
Public financing status: Certified as a publicly financed candidate

Ironically, tenants in subsidized programs often have more process rights than free-market renters. For example, most government subsidized programs have a requirement for cause for eviction, with an opportunity for the tenant to remedy the cause.

In contrast, in the private market a landlord can remove a tenant with no cause in a month-to-month agreement or at the end of a lease. I am open to looking at the City creating a for-cause (with remedy options) regulation by ordinance (if the Legislature has not pre-empted this area of jurisdiction) or lobbying the Legislature for greater tenants rights in cooperation with other communities and housing advocates.

This does not directly protect against rent hikes, but would help with lease abuses.

Part of the reason I’m running is to create City policies that will promote housing development for a variety of income levels, not just for those below 50% of median family income. More supply at a range of market levels will help take some pressure off of rents.

Jeff Bissonnette
Position sought: Commissioner #1
Website: portlandersforjeff.com
Public financing status: Certified as a publicly financed candidate

When I was a freshman at the University of Oregon, one of my first experiences in activism was helping to organize a consumer hotline which provided advice to callers about a range of consumer problems they were encountering. By far the most common questions dealt with renters' issues: deposits being kept by shady landlords, hazardous living conditions, unfair rents, sudden evictions, faulty facilities left unrepaired, and the list went on. I learned early about the injustices renters faced on a daily basis.

Today we are seeing housing opportunities for renters either shrink for a variety of reasons - conversion of apartment houses to condos, housing subsidy contracts expiring - or get increasingly expensive as housing costs have increased across the board. And we also have landlords that refuse to treat tenants with the respect that is due in a business relationship like the one between tenants and landlords. Overall, the increasing lack of affordable housing is part of a growing concern around who is able to afford to live in Portland and who is not. And as access to mortgages gets tighter in the wake of the subprime lending crisis, we will have to ensure that there are increased opportunities for affordable rental housing and that renters have the protections they need to maintain their homes.

The main issues that I would prioritize as a city commissioner would be:

* maintaining subsidized housing contracts for rental housing so that we do not have a net loss in affordable
rental housing units;
* encouraging the purchase of or establishing multi-year leases for additional rental housing stock to
increase the inventory of affordable housing units;
* ensuring that affordable housing units are spread throughout the city so that renters have a wide variety of
options of neighborhoods in which to live;
* increasing the capacity of existing local non-profit organizations involved in providing affordable housing
to build and manage more affordable housing units;
* working to establish ways on the local, state and federal levels for renters to build a good credit history
with a demonstrated record of steady rent and utility payment.
* improving tenant protection where possible on the local level and, as needed, advocating for increased
protections at the state level.

I will work with existing tenants' rights organizations such as the Community Alliance of Tenants and other affordable housing advocates such as the Affordable Housing NOW coalition and the Community Development Network to monitor and improve the status of renters on an ongoing basis.

Most of us at one time or another have been renters. Taking advantage of rental housing is often a stepping stone to home ownership but in many cases, is the only housing option that makes sense for an individual or a family. Affordable housing is a basic need to ensure that Portlanders at all income levels are able to be part of our community. I will work to ensure that renters are treated as the important economic players that they are.

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

Tenants have rights, and it is the City of Portland's duty to do more to protect renters, inform them of their rights, and preserve/provide affordable rental housing.

Renters are often treated like second class citizens. The person asking this question feared to give their name due to concern about retaliation, and theirs is but one example of the challenges renters face. I hope Blogtown readers who rent will offer your own experiences in the comments, as I know the questioner is not alone.

Recently, the Oregonian changed the header of its Sunday section advertising housing to "Homes and Rentals", as if people who rent do not live in a home. I lived in a Salvation Army shelter when I first immigrated, then in rental housing for seven years. The shelter wasn't home to me, but the apartments were. My neighborhood's homes are half rentals, half owner-occupied. I will work to improve housing affordability and quality for both buyers and renters.

If I am elected to the Portland City Council, I will:

1. Improve code compliance and enforcement processes. Gresham recently adopted mandatory periodic inspection of rental properties, so tenants don't have to complain and repairs are made without retaliation. Portland should ensure homes meet State laws requiring rental properties to be safe and well-maintained, in an orderly and routine process instead of a complaint-driven one. The City Council should do more to identify, adopt, and implement policies to protect tenants from retaliatory evictions. The City's Bureau of Housing and Community Development convened a Quality Rental Housing Working Group in September 2007, to make recommendations on policy and implementation improvements. I hope establishing routine inspections is one of the outcomes.

2. Lead a public process to amend current Portland City Code language that allows landlords to refuse to rent to people using Section 8 vouchers. State regulations prohibit discrimination based on source of funds, except for vouchers. Portland chooses to uphold the carve-out even though we are allowed to make our code more equitable. The effort in 1999 to change this was unsuccessful. The promised task force to re-examine the issue within one year has not yet been formed. I remember and keep promises.

3. Work with the Portland Development Commission to ensure enforcement of requirements that subsidized projects remain affordable for 60 years, and to provide more rental housing instead of condominiums. Continue tax abatement programs outside of Urban Renewal Areas that promote rehabilitation of rental properties.

4. Continue to allocate City funds to preserve and renovate affordable rental housing. Housing is a human right, and provision of housing is one of the City's core responsibilities. Retaining and upgrading existing housing is half the cost of building new units.

5. Work with the entire City Council to push for funding and regulatory changes at the State and Federal level. Community Development agencies should receive direct allocations from the federal government rather than pass-through tax credits. I will work to generate political momentum at the State Legislature to allow rent protections and other safeguards for renters. After being an early leader in the 1970s, Oregon has not kept pace with other states in adopting laws that protect tenants, and the balance has shifted in favor of landlords.

6. Work in partnership with community organizations providing affordable rental housing and assisting tenants, and publicize the good work they do. The Community Development Network's members provide over 7,000 affordable rental homes. The Community Alliance of Tenants informs renters of their rights and helps resolve issues (person who asked this week's question, call their Renters Rights Hotline at 503-288-0130). Multnomah County's 211 line is an excellent resource and referral service.

7. Improve education of tenants and landlords about housing laws, good neighbor principles, and best practices. Increase access to legal services (available from the Fair Housing Council, with some funding provided by the Bureau of Housing and Community Development; from Legal Aid Services of Oregon; or from the Oregon Law Center), and mediation (through the Office of Neighborhood Involvement).

Legal remedies for tenant problems should be the last resort. Renters don't have time or money to sue after unfair eviction or spurious maintenance charges, and few retaliation charges are upheld in court given landlords' right to give 30-day no-cause eviction notices. Regulations and routine inspections should be in place so that clean, safe rental homes are provided without tenant complaints.

These aren't academic rules and policy changes. These decisions and strategies directly affect people's security and quality of life here in Portland.

In a healthy city, residents need affordable and safe homes, whether they own or rent. I care about renters, homeowners, and people experiencing homelessness. If you vote to elect me as your next City Commissioner, I will work to ensure that all Portlanders have safe, pleasant homes, in 95 safe, pleasant neighborhoods.

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

I can understand why the reader who submitted this question is frustrated. Like many residents in Portland, this person’s rent has increased astronomically while his or her tax dollars have gone to subsidize "development" that only benefits a few elite individuals. Rather than subsidizing million dollar condos that are affordable only to the wealthy few, we must increase our investment in affordable housing including offering assistance to renters. While we should be encouraging home ownership, we also must be sensitive to the fact that purchasing a home isn't an option for everyone.

The affordable housing shortfall leaves many families with few housing options. Renters can be evicted from their homes with little notice. Some unscrupulous landlords use the threat of eviction to intimidate renters from filing complaints about their living situation. Gresham has implemented a common sense solution to this problem. Rather than have a complaint driven system, which allows for landlord intimidation, Gresham now has mandatory inspection of all rental units. This will force "slumlords" to shape up and ensure that vulnerable tenants aren't being exploited.

We also need to reexamine our use of urban renewal areas. By capping property taxes in some areas of town, other neighborhoods are being asked to make up for lost revenue in the form of property taxes and special fees / taxes – costs that landlords often pass on to their tenants. Faced with the option of paying higher rent or moving out of town, many working families are choosing the latter. For the first time in modern history, Portland has a mass migration of families leaving the city and moving to Beaverton, Hillsboro, Tigard and Vancouver.

I also support the schools-families-housing initiative that links the City's housing, community and educational needs. Over the past decade, our schools have lost 11,000 students and an estimated $60 million in operating revenue that was tied directly to those students. By providing rent subsidies to working families, we can make sure our schools aren't "under-crowded" and that our schools have a healthy funding base.

Please find out more about my concerns online at www.CharlesLewis.com

Local bloggers Brian Libby and Cuisine Bonne Femme have news on two new projects downtown. Great content guys—thanks for working so hard on these important development issues, so us “reporters” don’t have to.

Last Friday, I reported that the Sho Dozono campaign appeared to asking the city auditor about pulling out of public funding. After checking in with the campaign, manager Amie Abbott pointed out that it was Stephanie Dozono—the candidate’s daughter—who had asked, and she didn’t speak for the campaign (though the answers from the auditor’s staff were sent to Abbott, the candidate, and other candidate staffers). She also said they were not considering dropping out of public funding. Dozono is the last candidate awaiting final certification. I dropped by the auditor’s office today to see if they had a sense of when we might hear the decision… no luck.

Back to Abbott. Here’s what she said on Friday:

“Stephanie Dozono is not authorized to speak on behalf of the Dozono campaign.”…

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.”

Today, Abbott wrote in to clarify that statement.

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.

I’ve already mentioned Dozono’s big campaign event this weekend, but here’s the info again:

(Click on that for a bigger image.)

Answering Erik’s question of what Hollywood actor Tim Robbins is doing in Portland: He pulled up at City Hall briefly this afternoon to watch a citizens’ protest over the mayor’s decision to shove off public testimony on a damning report about the Independent Police Review until council has had a chance to discuss it amongst themselves:ROBBINS: Said he planned to burrow into Gary Blackmer’s office with a spoon… [Photo by the omnipresent Teresa Teater.]

Council had planned to hear public testimony at a hearing scheduled today, but will now have a “work session” on the 18th, with no public testimony, to decide what to do with the recommendations. Then perhaps hear public testimony the next day, once it’s all a done deal.

That has cop oversight advocates hopping mad—they say council now gets to decide what to do with a consultant’s damning report on the so-called “Independent” Police Review without hearing what the community thinks. Undeterred, Portland Copwatch organized a public hearing of their own today, inviting council to attend if they felt so inclined:
CITY COUNCIL: Really cares what the public has to say on this issue…

Still, never mind. The community had their say, regardless:
COMMUNITY OUTRAGE: Venting on the City Hall steps…

“We do not need an imitation of the internal affairs division of the Portland Police Bureau,” said Reverend Doctor Leroy Haines. “We need a citizen police review committee that has credibility in the community.”

“The argument always used by the City Auditor is that we should do it behind closed doors so that we don’t antagonize the police,” said Martin Gonzales, on the committee for justice for Jose Mejia Poot. “But what is there to antagonize?”

“Auditor Blackmer has responded with such dismissal to these recommendations that we believe it is not fair to the community and to the fair-minded people of Portland,” said Kayse Jama of the Coalition for Intercultural Organizing.

“By canceling public testimony, the Council effectively ignores the public,” said Jason Renaud of the Mental Health Association of Portland.

Dan Handelman of Portland Copwatch said the average city settlement payout for police misconduct has not changed since the IPR was established. It’s averaged $469,721 per year between 1993 and 2005. In fact, since the IPR was established in 2001, payouts have risen, slightly. In 2003, for example, $1.3m was paid out.

It’s not clear what Robbins’ interest was—he watched proceedings for a few minutes, chatted with some people in the crowd, then got back in his minivan and drove off. Still, it leant a pleasant air of surreality to the whole affair.

Afterwards, the advocates tried delivering copies of their testimony to the city auditor (who sent a lackey out to collect the documents) and to all the city commissioners. The mayor sent public safety assistant Jared Spencer out to talk to the public. Asked whether the mayor cares what the public thinks about the process, Spencer responded: “Of course.” Why didn’t he come out and listen to them, then?
VIDEO BY INTERN JONATHAN SHAPIRO: Failed to get a shot of Tim Robbins…but never mind…