Great reporting, boss. That has stinky stink politicking all over it.

Gaming the public? The legislation's proponents, led by Commissioner Adams, have worked meticulously to gather community support for this plan, with only these few lobbyists seriously opposing (and didn't they promise to support the initiative in another form?).

Addressing the continuing transportation maintenance & infrastructure backlog is crucial, and adding new bike-friendly infrastructure is a fine idea. That our current city council and a community critical mass has worked to lead on this issue is great for our city.

I thought it was strange, trying to sneak through a tax just before he ran for election. The way this is being handled looks remarkably duplicitous.

I don't think it's stinky at all. City Council needs to take leadership and action here, and I support anything they can to prevent the oil lobby from determining the fate of essential city services and infrastructure. Randy is the perfect guy for taking this action. He's virtually assured of re-election because we LIKE IT when commissioners illustrate this kind of leadership. It's very similar to how he skillfully (and in my opinion, singlehandedly) affected the outcome of the botched up Chavez situation.

If we put everything up to the voters, Portland would suck.

Go Randy! The gas station and convenience store owners agreed to support the tax in exchange for a lower tax rate, then blew the agreement off. Gas stations and those stores are profiting off our roads and need to put in their fair share. Whiners.

Raise the tax for gas stations and convenience stores to the original level.

Here's what it takes to pass a new tax in Portland: friends in the right places.

Forget democracy. Right?

We live in a republic, Matt.

"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands..."

I am with Matt on this. The move to break the legislation in to three parts the first time smelled bad, this smells worse.

Yes, the OPA is also guilty of being but duplicitous but I can "accept" bad behavior from them; they answer to no one but themselves.

"Ends justify the means" nonsense from my representatives? No way, no how. Why? Because you never when YOU will be on the receiving end.

Randy, I am on your side of this issue, but please drop this thing so we can get back on a high road.

This whole deal has struck me as political gaming. Now that Randy feels it is important enough to push forward, I feel much less dubious. No tongue in check, seriously. Adams seems to focused on his political ideals which usually are focused for 1) upper middle class, or 2) bikers or 3) both.

Folks (especially those in Adams' office) must understand many Portland'ers mistrust of politicians like Adams given the rapid gentrification of our city. I see Seattle, San Fran, Bend..etc and pray that our fair city doesn't morph any further towards pushing out poor 30k per years peeps like me.

Perhaps all his posts are just clever variations of his classic, "Racist."

When legislation created with input from so many stakeholders can be derailed by a small number of lobbyists, it is necessary to be strategic. There are people in the City who will organize to oppose any tax regardless of the amount or purpose.

The "so many stakeholders" thing hardly gives these type of political moves any credence. Plus a lot of those "stakeholders" were lobbying for their own piece of the pie.

Did you see in the Oregonian that a 2,000 square foot bar will be charged $150 a month but a 100,000 square foot book store will be charged only twice that much?

Do you believe that a bookstore that is 50 times bigger than a bar only has twice as many customers?

Wait, this just in! Turns-out one of Portland's favorite union busters Michael Powell was one of the holders of a stake (I am guessing a big one!) but I am certain that he operated with no self-interest.

Look, let's call a spade a spade. A lot of this package has been shaped by lobbyists and special interests.

The core of it is still solid enough: we need a local tax to deal with these local transportation problems, Salem isn't coming to our rescue.

Sam Adams lied about the needing 3-parts due to legal reasons, Romain lied about not funding a referral. Leonard is now jumping in the mud pit.

The fact that I support the street fee doesn't mean that I should be foolish enough to accept that these things are ok.

I don't like big oil, but I don't like seeing politicians screw with the system. I don't want to end up getting f*cked in the future because I thought it was ok for them to do it now.

The original plan presented to stakeholders during Commissioner Adams' "road trip" on the topic included a gasoline consumption tax, which makes far more sense to me than the billing fee we are ending up with. That early phase of the plan had the merit of directly including automobile users in the responsibility for maintaining the roads, including the flood of WA plates one sees Monday through Friday on Sandy Blvd during rush hours.

"We live in a republic."

Not for long, Randy. Not if I get my way.

Randy and Adam are afraid of the public. Nice try Randy, that was very nice quote, wonder what it means to you??
Your idea of banning spray can was smart, did it work??
Now you want to build Great Wall of China around city of Portland using citizen tax money, I bet you would use the same method to get around public vote.
Mind you, criminal element still persist, you are clueless about solving problems.
What about 50 million cost over-run / budget for Tram? That was blamed on low level city employee!!

Kudos Commissioner Leonard.

This has been a very open process. As a member of the 89 person stakeholder committee, a wide variety of business and citizen groups were represented. The committee voted unanimously to support the measure. However the Petroleum lobby showed up once and wrote off the process. It has always been their way or the highway.

Within the process there was compromise, like there is hopefully in most processes, and even a compromise was made for the Petroleum lobby after not sitting at the table. Then talk about bait and switch.

It is the duty of the elected City Council to protect the citizens and businesses from this bad-faith maneuvering.

Kudos.

Nice work Randy!

I'll take Safe, Sound and Green any day over Big Oil and Big Loser lobbyists.

Just watch, I'll bet the Rose Garden that if Council moves forward with the three measures -- Paul Romain will have yet another excuse for why he needs to refer this effort.

As a Portlander that is still pissed about the six bike fatals this year -- I can't wait to see 100+ miles of bike boulevard.

Nice work Randy!

I'll take Safe, Sound and Green any day over Big Oil and Big Loser lobbyists.

Just watch, I'll bet the Rose Garden that if Council moves forward with the three measures -- Paul Romain will have yet another excuse for why he needs to refer this effort.

As a Portlander that is still pissed about the six bike fatals this year -- I can't wait to see 100+ miles of bike boulevard.

Jack @15, what bar are you talking about? The fee is based on the number of car trips your business generates. And if you don't agree with the trips allocated to your business, you can appeal to the City. It took me about 30 seconds to find this:
http://www.commissionersam.com/files/Exhibit3RateCalculationMethodology.pdf

Plus, if I'm not mistaken, Powell's has contributed significantly to alternative modes of transportation (like Streetcar), which reduces car trips to its store and impacts to the roads.

Nice post, Scott!

BTW, did you notice that ExxonMobil turned a $40 BILLION profit in 2007; ChevronTexaco could only muster a measly $18.7 BILLION profit.

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-Earns-Oil.html

This is who opposes Safe, Sound and Green, folks.

Skinny Girl,

Check out the file you linked to. For businesses, the cost per trip goes down for businesses as they demand more from the transportation system.

Does it really cost less to provide streets to any business for trip number 10,001 versus trip 10,000?

Is the cost of maintaining the roads for providing the 250,001th trip to Target or Fred Meyer cost really only .00003 percent of trip number 10,000? Check out the link - $0.01525 per trip versus $0.00005 per trip.

This is why a 100,000 square foot bookstore will pay only about twice as much as a 2,000 square foot bar.

The big boys had their own chair at the table and probably in the office of the Commissioner while this thing was being hammered together.

As for Powell's contribution to the Street Car or whatever, a lot of businesses of every size do the "right thing" but that shouldn't make them exempt from paying their fair share.

I've updated this story, here.

"We live in a republic."

Not for long, Randy. Not if I get my way.

Posted by Matt Davis | February 1, 2008 1:09 PM

After whipping your ancestors collective British asses at the Battle of Yorktown in 1781, we really should have set sail for England to finish the job.

I don't think the tax should apply to folks who are on fixed incomes, or the disabled who use their vehicles going back/forth to medical appointments and the grocery store. The tax ought to be indexed to the number of miles a household drives per year. I drive less than 10k miles a year, so why should I pay the same tax that a household with 4-6 drivers who are driving 50-80k miles a year?

And why aren't we addressing the damage done to streets by studded tires and big trucks - shouldn't they pay more?

Hey Randy!

Why stop there! We have a lot of ass-kicking we never finished...let's see there is the Mexicans...there are still some Native Americans around...the Spanish...How about the Germans or Italians or Japanese? Definitely the Koreans or Vietnamese...boy the list could really go on and on...

How about you kick your own ignorant ass instead? Of course that would result in some brain damage...

Hey Jack! Start drinking de-caf dude. Or don't you oil types swing that way.