Speaking of meeting the contenders, five of these candidates were on stage last night at PCC Cascade, answering questions largely related to racial disparities in income, education, home ownership, and incarceration. KOIN anchor Ken Boddie moderated, with Sam Adams, Sho Dozono, Craig Gier, Beryl McNair and Christopher Rich participating.

Dozono’s answers largely revolved around his view that “I believe our city government is gridlocked, frankly broken.” Adams, meanwhile, stuck to his theory: “Portland is a great city, but we need to be humble in the knowledge that Portland isn’t great for everyone.” He had one of my favorite lines of the night, when noting that the next mayor will oversee the adoption of the Portland Plan: It’s “a 25 year plan. Not a vision, not a wish list.”

Gier was a crowd favorite, with his self-effacing wit (“I’m young enough that I haven’t been corrupted yet”). McNair had good points to make on home ownership and leveling the playing field for everyone, but she was the least polished of the candidates—often referring to her notes and tripping up. Rich proved himself as the most Libertarian of the candidates so far, saying as mayor, he’d give people a hand up instead of a hand out, and espousing values like an opposition to the day laborer center, and to “drugging our children into complacency.”

I may post audio later, but to be honest, it wasn’t a very exciting forum. There was very little back and forth between the candidates, and on most of the issues, candidates had the same things to say.

Anyways, onto this week’s question!

The last candidate who turned in more than 1,000 signatures has been certified for public financing. What are your thoughts on the program? Why did you or didn’t you participate? Also, would you vote to put the program to a public vote in 2010?

Jim Lee’s up first, but I’m putting everyone after the cut. And, for the second week in a row, Sho Dozono has opted not to answer. Funny, that.

Jim Lee
Position sought: Mayor
Website: blogmayor.com
Financial status: Intends to raise less than $300

Public financing of our elections is a great idea, but candidates and prospective candidates must learn to use it properly. I was dismayed to see a prosperous business person and an anointed political staffer invoke the program less than a month before the deadline. Legislative intent was to bring less than well connected and less than wealthy citizens into the electoral arena, not to pave another another fund-raising avenue for the rich insider and the political operative.

As a theorist in the physical sciences I look for anomalies--unusual numbers, for example. Sho Dozono collected signatures and $5s at the rate of 200 per day, Jim Middaugh at 100 per day. For comparison, Charles Lewis’s rate was 5 per day over six months, and Amanda Fritz’s rate was 15 per day over ten weeks. To a physicist these are “order-of-magnitude” anomalies, and merit investigation. How did D&M do it?

I communicated my concern to Council, then attended a meeting of the Citizen Campaign Commission. Dozono’s treasurer remarked that the extraordinary enthusiasm for his candidacy caused the great rate of collection; I replied that there is no place on the signature form to register the emotional state of contributors. Also I attended a signature event for Middaugh; everyone seemed hyped; I managed to escape with my $5 still in my wallet.

Everyone who files for office deserves to be trusted, at least initially. But Middaugh and Dozono were, between them, angling for $350,000 of citizens’ money. Neither gave me a chance to cut the cards, to be sure they were not playing the Boyles-Golovan game from the previous campaign.

Four candidates asked me for $5; I checked each carefully; then I gave to three. From what I have learned since, two others conducted themselves with probity, so I would have signed their forms too, had they asked.

I did not participate in Voter Owned Elections because it is not my style, nor did I have the network necessary to succeed. Yes, I would put the program to a public vote in 2010, but with changes to keep the likes of Dozono and Middaugh out of the action.

Neither the Council nor the Auditor addressed my concerns about those two. The final recourse is for voters to reject Middaugh and Dozono for lack of transparency in acquisition of taxpayers’ money.

Craig Gier
Position sought: Mayor
Website: myspace.com/craiggierformayor
Financial status: Intends to raise less than $300

My thoughts on this program are as follows, there is no reason what so ever to fund the campaigns of politicans. It doesn't matter where the money comes from. People are gonna form opinions of you no matter what you do. The money could be spent on lots of other things, like all day kindergarten, mental health care for people in this city, fixing the roads and so on. I didn't participate because this is a screwed up program that sammy and his buddies forced in and that sho is stealing from. Yes I would put it to a vote like everything should be. Also I would like people to research this subject alot, it is a ripoff. It should be called Voter Billed Elections.

Thank you for your time.

Christopher Rich
Position sought: Mayor
Website: myspace.com/chrisrich4mayor
Financial status: $0 in contributions, $0 currently in the bank

I do not believe in the public financing program, nor am I participating in it. The public is already paying the cost for poor leadership. Why should they pay to also fund the campaigns of those that are most likely going to tax them more and not work in their best interest? It doesn't make sense.

If a candidate doesn't have the wherewithal to promote and manage their campaign without hand-out's, how can they expected to generate revenue sources without taxing the citizens of Portland even further?

I feel the citzens should be able to keep this money for themselves to do with as they please. At the very least, it should be going to schools in need.

I would support putting this issue in front of the voters in 2010.

Thanks!
Christopher Rich
myspace.com/chrisrich4mayor

Sam Adams
Position sought: Mayor
Website: samforpdx.com
Financial status: $136,581.40 in contributions, $60,180.05 currently in the bank

I still support the program, although I must acknowledge recent events have shaken my confidence in how it is being fleshed out and implemented.

As a city commissioner I voted to establish the Voter-Owned Elections system. In so doing, we continued the great Oregon tradition of innovation to improve our local democracy. The program needs continued refinement and improved performance before it goes to voters in 2010, which, as mayor, I will make sure happens.

In the current mayor’s race, a quarter of the candidates have concluded they must file formal complaints challenging the city auditor’s certification of one of the candidates simply to fight for fair treatment. An impartial judge will hear those complaints soon.

As an observer, however, it’s my view that if a candidate can receive a contribution valued at more than double the legal limit just before completing formal candidate paperwork without penalty, the system is deeply flawed. There is no escaping the common-sense conclusion that such actions are intended to game the system.

The specific facts in this case confirm this reality in dramatic fashion: one of the city’s long-time corporate lobbyists made a one of the largest corporate contributions in the City’s history to a mayoral campaign while the candidate just days later pledged rhetorically to remain free of corporate influence.

When I voted to establish the Voter Owned Elections program, it was certainly my expectation that all candidates deserved equal treatment. As a candidate I chose not to participate because I wanted to avoid the appearance of voting to help myself. If the system is to be saved, it must ensure voters that their candidates will be treated fairly. It still holds promise, as is reflected by the exciting range of political newcomers in the race to replace me as city commissioner, as they seem to be following both the letter and spirit of the program.

Kyle Burris
Position sought: Mayor
Website: site not up yet
Financial status: Intends to raise less than $300

I'll be honest; I'm not sure where I stand on the public financing issue. All the feel-good bi-products we've seen so far are clashing with my libertarianistic sensibilities, and it's leaving me with a sort of loathsome apathy that I don't know what the hell to do with. It's a complicated question of ends vs. means, and I'm really not up for debating myself this week.

I'll tell you this though; I definitely support putting the program on the ballot. It's the people's money, and they should always have the final say in how it's spent.

Jeff Taylor
Position sought: Mayor
Website: portland123.com
Financial status: -$31,420.95 currently in the bank, the balance of a loan to himself

Did not respond by deadline.

Sho Dozono
Position sought: Mayor
Website: shoformayor.com
Financial status: $200,000 in public funding, $26,522.77 currently in the bank (final check from the city hasn't been deposited)

Did not respond by deadline.

Beryl McNair
Position sought: Mayor
Website: myspace.com/301848721
Financial status: $220.00 in contributions, $220.00 currently in the bank

Did not respond by deadline.

Patricia Stuart
Position sought: Mayor
Website: myspace.com/votepatriciastuart
Financial status: Intends to raise less than $300

Did not respond by deadline.

Steven Entwisle
Position sought: Mayor
Website: myspace.com/votepatriciastuart
Financial status: Intends to raise less than $300

Just joined the race last week.

Bob Leonard Forthan
Position sought: Mayor
Website: rfortha.wordpress.com
Financial status: Intends to raise less than $300

Just joined the race last week.

David Ackerman
Position sought: Mayor
Website: none
Financial status: Intends to raise less than $300

Just joined the race last week.

Marking the 5th anniversary of the invasion, about a thousand people marched today to protest the war in Iraq. All went off without a hitch. It rained throughout but people were mostly in good spirits. No trouble between protesters and cops.

Soggy protesters

More soggy protesters

More soggy protesters

Soggy U.S. Senate candidate Jeff Merkley talking to some soggy folks

Day Three - SXSW 2008
Total Number of Bands Seen:
Only 9. Vampire Weekend, Ravens & Chimes, Builders and the Butchers, Laura Marling, The Choir Practice, Cool Kids, A-Trak, Kid Sister, The Constantines.
Total Number of Tacos Consumed:
A mighty trifecta (pictured above), moving me into a first place tie in our dumb binge eating contest.
Notable Shows That I Was Unable to See:
Two. Night Marchers day show and Fucked Up playing under a bridge, like trolls.
Celebrity Sightings:
Three. Perry Farrell, dancing by himself with a pole, M1 from Dead Prez partaking in a vegan taco next to me at Mr. Natural, and Ice Cube, standing nearby at Kid Sister.

Yesterday was nice. I experienced the greatest SXSW show I have ever seen (The Constantines), basked in the blinding hype of Vampire Weekend, and stood next to the star of Are We There Yet?. Not bad.

Watching Vampire Weekend is a bit like walking in on a meeting of the young WASP society—which is a total cheap shot I know—but if the New York band is trying to kick their prep school roots, it's not working. Also, while seeing them onstage, it feels like they are the next generation of the Shins, except they skipped over the first two amazing records and made their very own Wincing the Night Away right off the bat. But then again, "Oxford Comma" is still one hell of a song.

After last year's botched effort to see every single Portland band, I'm taking it easy on catching bands from our town, but I made the exception for the Builders and the Butchers. They drew a surprisingly large crowd, the majority of which was made up of fancy A&R representatives, and other industry movers and shakers. The writing has been on the wall for some time now that their stomp and holler junkyard punk/folk is going to be all the rage, now I guess it's just a matter of time.

British singer-songwriter Laura Marling is supposedly the new Kate Nash (or the new new Lily Allen), but her songs seemed like they still needed some work as they plodded along, sounding sweet, but without much substance. Like a poorer, British, version of our very own Day of Lions (Day of Lyons?). We fled, heading around the corner and catching the adorable Choir Practice, a vocal-rich twee ensemble from Vancouver, B.C.. Just look at them, sashes and all...

C-U-T-E.

Yesterday's goal was to break away from the heavy slab of indie rock white bread I've been digesting and try something new, something with a bit more diversity. We narrowly missed Dizzee Rascal, but didn't have trouble making it into a packed Cool Kids performance. I thought they were a tad bit redundant, but they were just killing time for Kid Sister, whose performance came along with complimentary nail painting, and a whole lot of hype for an emcee who was excellent, and a bit spastic, in the live setting. I hope she comes to Portland. Soon.

But of all the bands I've seen so far, nothing comes close to The Constantines. A few notes into their blaring set, I turned to End Hits blogger Rob and shouted "THIS IS THE GREATEST BAND ON THE PLANET!!!" But, given the deafening volume, it probably just sounded like "JTXAQU OPTTS VEWQU QGFATFRDSS!!!"

They were an absolutely unrelenting combination of every single reason why you fell in love with rock and roll in the first place. The bassist lost his shoe, the singer flinches from pain with every raspy word he yelps, and the guitar player is wearing a cast—it was bruised and battered but it worked.

My head is spinning and I’m pretty sure there is a slow trickle of blood cresting from my hissing ear (I left the handy ear plugs at the hotel, bad move, I know), but I’d be lying if I didn’t say the Constantines performance was the best SXSW show I have ever seen. A remarkably intense experience that took their “Springsteen meets Fugazi” sounds to an entirely new level.

To close, the band chose a cover, one fitting for the grand nature of the evening. ACDC’s “Thunderstruck,” but not in that traditional ballsy guitar god style, instead the Constantines ran the song through a filter of 20-plus years of Dischord punk and angular aggression, sounding like Lungish’s Dan Higgins playing the roll of Brian Johnson. Like every thing else they did this evening, it was amazing.

No contest!

Are you the type of person who says, “Hey… it’s St. Paddy’s day weekend, and there aren’t any good Leprechaun movies out! WHAT THE EFF?!?” Well, thankfully, Super Deluxe has stepped up to this daunting task with the following trailer for Leprechaun 12: Suburban Sprawl. Begorrah!

Because leprechauns scare the crap outta me, I’m laying low this weekend. But there’s a lot of stuff going on…

From the Destination Fun this week…

Flogging Molly, the Runaway Boys; Crystal Ballroom, 1332 W Burnside, Thurs March 13, 9 pm, FREE with ticket from www.jdstudiono7.com, 21+

St. Patrick’s Day Festival, Kells, 112 SW 2nd, Fri March 14 through Mon March 17, $10-20 per day

Shamrock Run, Governor Tom McCall Waterfront Park, SW Naito between Stark & Oak, Sun March 16, 8 am, $19-29 entry fee

K.M.R.I.A., My Life in Black and White; Crystal Ballroom, 1332 W Burnside, Mon March 17, 9 pm, $10, 21+

Shane MacGowan Lookalike Contest, w/Nodding Tree Remedies, Fenbi International Superstars, Ingredients; Ash Street Saloon, 225 SW Ash, Mon March 17, 8 pm, $5

Check out St. Patty’s weekend listings after the jump…

Not feeling Irish this weekend? Hit Found It! for more entertaining options.

FRIDAY
Alberta Street Public House–Celilo, 6:30 pm, free; Beglan's Irish Jam, 9 pm, free
Biddy McGraw's–Billy Kennedy, 6 pm; Sweet City Slang, 9:30 pm
Kells–St. Patrick's Day Fest: Need Fire, St. James Gate, Grafton Street, Amadan, The Chancers, Tom May, 5:30 pm, $10
PPAA–Dale Russ, Tom Creegan, Mikey Beglan, Bob Soper, Sam Keator, 8 pm, $12
Thirsty Lion Pub & Grill–Matt Vrba, 9:30 pm

SATURDAY
Alberta Street Public House–Will West, Keegan Smith, J. Malem, Don Haupt, 6 pm; Sassparilla, The Mighty Ghosts of Heaven, Gabe Rozzell, 9:30 pm, $5
Biddy McGraw's–Redray Frazier, Michael Jodell, 9:30 pm
Dublin Pub–Badfish Band, 10 pm, $5
Edgefield–St. Patrick's Day Fest: Freak Mountain Ramblers, David Dodson, Midnight Serenaders, 3 pm, free
Kells–St. Patrick's Day Fest: Need Fire, Amadan, St. James Gate, Jesse Cain, Grafton Street, Tom May, Bridgetown, 11:30 am, $15
Mississippi Studios–James Low, Caleb Klauder, 7 pm, $10-12
Norse Hall–St. Patrick's Day Fest, all day
Thirsty Lion Pub & Grill–Will Bradley, Joseph Konty, 9:30 pm

SUNDAY
Backspace–BRO Benefit: Here Comes a Big Black Cloud, Hey Lover, World's Greatest Ghosts, Sleepyhead, Dirty Mittens, Almost Nearly, 7 pm, $7-12, all ages
Biddy McGraw's–Irish Circle: Hanz Araki, Cary Novotny, 8 pm
Doug Fir–Basic Rights Oregon Benefit: Do N Dudes, Queer Burlesque, Maria XXXVI, Kritik, Johnny O, 8 pm, $20
Edgefield–St. Patrick's Day Fest: Needfire, Old Yellers, X-Angels, 3 pm, free
Kells–St. Patrick's Day Fest: Josh Gracin, Ruby Red, St. James Gate, Tom May, Amadan, Grafton Street, The Chancers, 12:30 pm, $15-20
Moon and Sixpence–Foghorn Stringband, free
Someday Lounge–BRO Benefit: Alan Singley & Pants Machine, Oh Captain My Captain, Swim Swam Swum, The Vonneguts, Palo Verde, Gregory Miles Harris, 7 pm, $7-12
Thirsty Lion Pub & Grill–Charlie Jenkins, Brian O'Dell, Keegan Smith, Smoking Lounge, 9:30 pm

MONDAY
Biddy McGraw's–St. Patrick's Day Fest: St. James Gate, Felim Egan, Circled by Hounds, Timothy Hull, Danny O'Hanlon, Brendan Fitzgerald, Bob Soper, The Texecutioners, noon
Dublin Pub–Acoustic Minds, Keegan Smith, 10 pm
Edgefield–St. Patrick's Day Fest: The Strange Tones, Old Yellers, Quick & Easy Boys, 3 pm, free
Holy Rosary Hall–St. Patrick's Day Fest, 4 pm, $5-10
Kells–St. Patrick's Day Fest: Need Fire, St. James Gate, Amadan, Grafton Street, Tom May, Bridgetown, noon, $20
Kennedy School–St. Patrick's Day Fest: Freak Mountain Ramblers, Hanz Araki, Dave Cory, 4:30 pm, free, all ages
Moon and Sixpence–St. Patrick's Day Fest: Johnny B. Connolly, 3 pm
Thirsty Lion Pub & Grill–Eric John Kaiser, Matt Vrba, Holding Out, Skoolyard, Tragedy Andy, Jacob Merlin, Remasters, 9:30 pm

Even if you missed last night’s fashion show fund raiser for DoveLewis, you can still chip in for the cause: Garnish (1524 NE Alberta) is donating 10 percent of purchases to the 24-hour animal hospital, so you can feel a little less guilty about any splurging that should occur…

More sale info and more on M.O.D.

I just spoke with John Branam—who also commented to the earlier post asking questions about whether he overpaid or back paid his campaign manager, Phil Busse.

Branam denies paying Busse for work he did as campaign manager before Branam was certified as a publicly financed candidate. The $16,000 in pay so far “is compensation for his tremendous work that he has put in since we received public funding as well as what he’s going to continue to do given his expansive role.” That “expansive role” involves being the campaign’s media buyer, copywriter, and general consultant (things that I thought were part and parcel of any campaign manager’s role in a small budget campaign, but Branam disagrees).

“Phil has been working 7 days a week, 12 hours a day,” Branam says. “I believe in having people that are on my team that are willing to work their tails off. and Phil is doing that.” Branam points to their campaign being “the first to get out lawn signs, and getting out 300 of them” and their early and large ad buy as an example of Busse’s work.

He referenced the poll from the Fritz camp, which, given the reported length of questions, he believes “is not a cheap poll. That’s an expenditure she’s choosing to make, and that’s great. I’m choosing to put a significant amount into campaign staff, and in particular Phil.

So why give Busse a lump sum, instead of monthly or biweekly paychecks? A lump sum of $15,000 doesn’t look good the day after a campaign gets public funding.

“To be honest, Phil and I talked about it, and we just made the decision. We’ve certainly complied with all of the rules around campaign financing. We’ve been very diligent to stay within the 14 days [reporting requirement]. We try to be even more efficient than that. We’re staying within all the rules,” Branam says. “Paying him a larger chunk right off the bat when I have the utmost confidence in the work he was doing and was about to do didn’t seem to be of concern. Other campaigns are choosing to pay people monthly, that’s a strategic decision that they’re making.”

“I can appreciate people’s concerns,” he adds. “People are right to ask questions. These are strategic decisions that we’re making inside the campaign. If we win the election, and we’ll have come from being one of the least known candidates to one of the most known candidates, then the decisions will look smart.”

Also, for the record, Branam says he and Busse are not drinking buddies, as our original commenter posited. The two met in late summer, after “Phil was one of the people who was recommended by a friend of mine,” when Branam was asking around for suggestions of what to look for in a campaign manager and who might be interested. They met in mid-September for the first time, and Busse came on as a volunteer shortly thereafter.

I love Portland Food and Drink. I really do. But it has to be said: a current thread entitled “Defining Good Service” has essentially devolved into self-parody. (Someday I will compile an anthology of unintentionally hilarious food writing.)

On the etiquette of servers clearing plates from a table as diners finish vs. clearing the whole table after everyone is done (!), one commenter writes:

well thank god someone finally brought this up, because it is the biggest plight on the face of Portland service. I’m sure [premature plate-clearing] happens in other cities as well, but here it seems the norm to clear one plate at a time and i think servers believe they are doing the right thing, oblivious to the proper etiquette. …. so now the real question is ‘How do we educate servers about waiting to clear and at the same time educate the dining public, who weren’t brought up in an environment where this may be apparent already?’ Ideas, anyone?

Oh… dear. At the risk of outing myself as a Philistine, insofar as I care about this at all, I prefer to have plates cleared from the table as diners finish. Perhaps there are folks out there who prefer to wallow in their dining detritus until everyone at the table has finished gumming, but personally, I’d rather NOT sit elbow-deep in the the remains of my dinner while my macrobiotic-dieting date chews every bite fifty times. Rather than embark on a campaign of education for servers and diners, I’d like to propose we let Darwinism do its thang on this particular nicety. What do you think?

The Oregon Criminal Defense Lawyers Association is formally opposing Kevin Mannix’s November ballot measure to lock up drug addicts for three years after a first felony conviction, without offering drug treatment.

“It’s one-size-fits all, cookie-cutter justice that locks people up for no good purpose,” says Gordon Mallon, president of the OCDLA.

MANNIX: Wants to lock up drug addicts without giving them treatment…

The OCDLA is a nonprofit “guarding against the erosion of all citizens’ rights,” with over 1000 members drawn from attorneys, law professors and law students across the state. The group had its board meeting today to decide its official position on Mannix’s measure, and it will decide in June whether to endorse a compromise ballot initiative, first proposed by District Attorney Mike Schrunk, to increase mandatory sentences but also offer drug treatment.

An alert reader posted this in the comments to a candidate question last night about public financing:

Of course public funding is good for these candidates. How else can you enrich yourselves and your drinking buddies with public funds?

Take John Branam for example. First week he received his public funds he wrote a check to his campaign manager and friend Phil Busse for $16,000. Now either Busse is being back paid (which is illegal) or he’s being paid about $7000 a month for his work.

Check the public records if you need more info. Given that Busse was forced out of the Mercury for plagiarism I find it hard to believe that his “political operative” experience warrants him being paid probably in the upper echelons of political consultants here in the NW.

Regardless, since 16 grand is what Emily Boyles paid her daughter for “work” I find this spending of public funds very strange. John Branam please explain.

Indeed, Busse was paid $15,000 on February 28. Branam was certified—and able to spend more than the $15,255 he collected in $5 contributions and seed money—on February 21, with the $134,745 check issued on February 27.

I asked Busse and/or Branam to respond. Busse jumped into the comments, addressing the plagiarism and “forced out” allegations (saying they’re both untrue, the worst he’s guilty of is sloppy journalism), but skirting the back pay issue—and saying he’ll be paid $25,000 for the primary period:

And yes, my salary is public and well-earned. It is far less than I made as attorney, but far more than I made at the Mercury. It will amount to roughly $25,000 for the primary season.

Thanks for your interest and misguided accusations.

Phil Busse

The problem is—and I’ve got a call in to the Auditor to double check this—you can’t back pay your staff for work they did earlier in the campaign. That would have generated an “accounts payable” transaction, and those can’t exceed the money you’ve got in the bank from $5 contributions and seed money. (The Branam campaign had no wiggle room for an accounts payable from those initial contributions—my quick calculation shows they spent $15,670.48 pre-certification, a bit more than they’d actually collected.)

I’ve geeked out on city code after the cut, if you want to go in depth on this issue.

It’s possible Busse is simply being paid $15,000 (or $25,000, as he says) only going forward. But that works out to $8,333 a month from February 28—really, the first day Branam could start paying solid wages—to the May 20 primary.

To put that in context, that’s about twice as much as the campaign manager for Adams’ campaign. Dozono’s campaign manager has picked up about $8,000 for two months work.

In Branam’s own race, Amanda Fritz’s campaign manager—working since early January—grosses $3500 a month, as does Chris Smith’s manager.

Jeff Bissonnette’s manager got a $1200 check for six week’s work (before he picked up his city check, so that was from $5 contributions; I’ve got a call in to see if the rate has changed now that they’re certified She makes $3250 a month). Charles Lewis’ manager picks up $1500 a month.

I’ve asked Busse & Branam for further explanation.

From the city code governing public financing. Emphasis is mine:

C. Prohibited Uses. Revenues distributed to a Certified Candidate from the Campaign Finance Fund may not be:

1. Used to make any Expenditures for personal use prohibited by ORS Chapter 260 and Oregon Administrative Rules, including but not limited to:

a. Salary or payment to a Person, unless the Person is providing bona fide services to the campaign and is compensated at fair market value;

...

6. Used to pay for consulting services to a Person, unless the Person is providing bona fide services to the campaign and is compensated at fair market value;

As for back payment, that would fall under accounts payable. Here's the law and definition of that:

A. "Accounts Payable" means an amount owed to a creditor for the purchase of goods or services, or a pledge to make a Contribution, whether or not enforceable. A purchase is made when the obligation is first incurred, even if an invoice is not received until a later time. The date an order for goods or services is placed is the date an obligation is first incurred. The obligation for media buys is incurred when the media time is reserved. For the purposes of City Code Chapter 2.10, an Accounts Payable is considered an Expenditure.

B. The declaration of intent shall specify that the Candidate agrees:

...5. That after filing a declaration of intent and before becoming a Certified Candidate, a Candidate may not:

a. Accept Contributions, except for Qualifying Contributions as described in Section 2.10.070, or Seed Money Contributions and In-Kind Contributions as described in Section 2.10.050 ; or

b. Make campaign Expenditures from funds other than Qualifying Contributions and Seed Money Contributions. A Candidate who has filed a declaration of intent may not make Expenditures from funds received prior to filing the declaration; or

c. Incur Accounts Payable that exceed the total amount of available Seed Money or Qualifying Contributions.

G. To be eligible to become a Certified Candidate,

1. A Candidate shall not make campaign Expenditures from funds other than Qualifying Contributions as described in Section 2.10.070 and Seed Money Contributions as described in Section 2.10.050 during the applicable Qualifying Period.

2. A Candidate shall not incur Accounts Payable during the Qualifying Period unless the Candidate has sufficient Qualifying Contributions and Seed Money Contributions to repay the Accounts Payable.

Brought to you by Pampelmoose.

Because the big stories always break, just before lunch time…

1.ECONOMIC ROLLERCOASTER!!! The Fed steps in to save troubled investment bank Bear Stearns. To put this in context, Bear Stearns was being cited as a rock of economic stability as recently as last year. When someone said “Bear Stearns is backing this deal,” you knew your investment was safe. Just goes to show, you’re better off keeping your money under the bed!

BANK OF THE BED: Safer than Wells Fargo…

2.TIBET!!! Remember when Bjork yelled “TIBET” at a concert last week? It seems to have set off a massive great protest, which is turning violent in Beijing.

3.SUPERDELEGATES!!! Obama is cutting into Hillary Clinton’s nominations from top elected officials. Asked why they were changing their votes, the superdelegates responded: “Because he’s going to be president, and she isn’t. Dummy.”

4.FISHY? Is the Branham campaign backpaying or overpaying its campaign manager? John Branham’s campaign manager Phil Busse gets $15,000. More from Amy Ruiz, shortly.

5.THE RACIST CARD!!! Slate examines Clinton campaign doyenne Geraldine Ferraro’s comments about Obama, through a new lens.

Good day.

Mercury employees are the worst actors in the world. They’re always coming into my office saying, “Wah! Wah! Wah! I have the stomach flu.” Or “Wah! Wah! Wah! I’m so over-worked I’m suffering from a nervous breakdown.” Or “Wah! Wah! Wah! I just got an abortion.” WHAT A BUNCH OF FAKERS. What they need to do is to take some “acting” lessons. Maybe from Spider-Man’s James Franco? Sure, that sounds good.

Day Two - SXSW 2008
Total Number of Bands Seen:
19, I think. Bodies of Water (twice), No Kids, Born Ruffians, The Retribution Gospel Choir, Paper Route, Oh No! Oh My!, Dr. Dog, Saul Williams, Ezra Furman, Evangelicals, Joseph Arthur, Throw Me The Statue, Bon Iver (again), My Morning Jacket, Moby, Thurston Moore, Mark Kozelek (twice), Yo La Tengo, and Lou Reed.
Total Number of Tacos Consumed:
Sadly, only two. The tasty vegan chorizo taco is pictured above.
Notable Shows That I Was Unable to See:
Three. Jens Lekman (twice), Monontonix, Devin the Dude.
Rock Star That Currently Resembles My Deceased Jewish Grandmother, Adelle:
One. Lou Reed.

Good lord, what a day. While I failed miserably on my lone goal from yesterday—”Eat more tacos, two is not enough”—I did see nearly 20 bands over the course of the morning, afternoon, evening, and morning again. I won’t dare run through them all, so here’s some selected highlights, including a great set by Born Ruffians, Thurston Moore jumping on me, and Mark Kozelek performing sinful songs in the house of God.

Fueled by breakfast tacos (little did I know they'd be my last taste of taco deliciousness all day), we took part in a few day parties in various tents, museum lawns, and nasty clubs with offensive logos. Did I say offensive? I meant sexy. Damn sexy. Oh yeah, fuck that leg, just like that...

Anyway, the Torontonians in Born Ruffians were a real treat, a jangly and rollicking set of intelligent pop that reminded me of a hyperactive Pavement, or their fellow countrymen, the underrated Germans.

While I thought his latest album, the free downloadable (ala Radiohead) The Inevitable Rise and Liberation of Niggy Tardust!, was a bit of a mess, Saul Williams can be one hell of a live performer. His backing band looks like they just rolled out of the Thunderdome, while WIlliams himself was going with the Adam Ant look (but with more feathers), as he pounced about the stage with a confident swagger. The music? Eh, still the same muddled industrial rock topped by Williams' slam poetry flow.

I was reluctant to attend the Lou Reed tribute for all sorts of reasons, but mainly because it seems unnecessary. Haven't the last 20-30 years of indie rock, more or less, just been a tribute to Reed? In a world of underrated icons like your Arthur Lees and Daniel Johnstons, another celebration in honor of Lou Reed's genius isn't particularly high on my list. But there I was, and it wasn't as bad as I had feared. Each act performed an original song, then a Reed-penned cover. Yo La Tengo was great (as always), as was Thurston Moore, who looked like this...

...before suddenly leaping into the crowd and landing at my feet...

Thurston darling, nice work on not spilling my beer (pictured here in my hand), I appreciate it.

But the real highlight was not Reed himself, who was joined by Moby (he's totally like a vegan John Cale), but instead that honor goes to Mark Kozelek. The Sun Kil Moon frontman performed a pair of Reed songs, "Caroline Says," and a gorgeous take on "The Kids," with its stirring chorus of "They’re taking her children away/Because they said she was not a good mother/They’re taking her children away/Because of the things that they heard she had done." Up until that point my dance card for the evening was filled with Jens Lekman, but after seeing Kozelek perform, I knew I needed to see him again.

Sure enough, after about a half dozen more bands, that is just what I did.

He performed in the Central Presbyterian Church, which is, well, a church. We sit in the pews. He performs onstage under a giant cross. We rock. We pray. We great our neighbors, pass the collection plate, and cool our frosty Lone Star cans in the holy water. Not quite, but the show was painfully intimate, as Kozelek quickly admitted that he was hoping his acting career would have worked out so he'd never have to perform music again—honestly, he seemed pretty sincere about that statement—and he also unleashed a quick "goddamn," before admitting he was warned not to swear inside the church. When he wasn't insulting the precious ears of Christ with his sailor's mouth, Kozelek performed a mixed bag of beautiful tunes, including a few from his upcoming record, April. It was the perfect show to end a hectic day.

Tomorrow's Goals:
Diversify. SXSW is a glorious rainbow, so why am I slumming it in the lily white 'burbs of the festival? Other than Saul Williams, my SXSW has been like a nonstop parade of white dudes (and dudettes) making the indie rock.

Also, more tacos. Seriously. Eric Grandy and Rob Simonsen are at seven a piece, while I'm still at four. But I remember my grandfather's dying words about music festival taco binge eating, "Son, it's a marathon, not a sprint."

Then he died.

The Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and the Department of the Interior are holding hearings on the Warm Springs tribes’ $389 million proposal to build a casino in Cascade Locks. The Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) was laid out a few weeks ago and the federal government is giving people 90 days to voice their concerns.

Here at the Lloyd Center Doubletree Hotel, the crowd is in the hundreds and scores were turned away because of capacity limits.

A major issue is that the casino site is about an hour away from the Warm Springs tribes’ reservation, which has called into question the legality of the plan.

The Warm Springs tribe is convinced the casino is legal and can lift their community out of “third world” level economic hardship. The plan is supposed to create 2,000 jobs. Many tribesman are here in support of the plan.

Opponents of the development plan have been giving testimony for the last hour. Most have complained of the potential damage to the Columbia Gorge. The DEIS claims that the casino will have “low to medium” impact on the scenic views of the gorge and contribute “incrementally” to traffic along I-84. Many here don’t seem convinced.

After tonight, there is one additional hearing, and then the BIA will write a Final Environmental Impact Statement and hope the U.S. Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne, who has a history of opposing off-reservation casino sites, will sign off on it.

This is the race where you’ll find some thorough analysis of the public financing system. Five of the candidates are all certified publicly financed candidates (Mike Fahey is privately funded, and joining us this week!). What do they have to say about the program?

The last candidate who turned in more than 1,000 signatures has been certified for public financing. What are your thoughts on the program? Why did you or didn’t you participate? Also, would you vote to put the program to a public vote in 2010?

Chris Smith—one of the original proponents of the system—responded first:

Chris Smith
Position sought: Commissioner #1
Website: citizensmith.us
Financial status: $150,000 in public funding, $137,794.68 currently in the bank

I first had the opportunity to study public campaign financing in 2000, when I chaired a study for the City Club of Portland on Ballot Measure 6, which would have created a public campaign finance system for the Oregon Legislature and statewide offices. Our committee reached the conclusion that this approach, previously tried in other states, while not a cure for all campaign finance issues, would both help reduce the corrosive effects of big money in our politics and help create the opportunity for candidates with strong community support to run for office even if they could not tap traditional campaign funding sources.

While Measure 6 failed statewide (due in part to the influence of big-money contributions) it passed in Portland. I and others were encouraged by this, and I was happy to be part of the group of advocates who, working with Commissioner Sten and Auditor Blackmer, proposed Voter Owned Elections to City Council and were ultimately able to secure adoption of the system three years ago.

I am proud to be “getting a taste of my own medicine” by running as a Voter Owned Elections Candidate. Already, in two election cycles we have seen Voter Owned Elections create an effective cap on campaign spending for both participating and non-participating candidates, and in several races non-participating candidates have self-limited their maximum contributions to $500, far lower than was common in Council campaigns before the system was adopted.

And this year, I’m delighted that there are seven candidates who have qualified under the system, although I’d be more delighted if a few less of them were in the same race that I am.

We’re still learning and adjusting, but it’s working, creating more opportunities for participation by candidates and voters, and taking the big money out of our elections.

And yes, as I pledged in my campaign kick-off announcement, I am absolutely committed to keeping the pledge to refer this to the voters of Portland to pass judgment on in 2010 after they have seen it in operation, as was promised when the system was adopted.

Charles Lewis
Position sought: Commissioner #1
Website: charleslewis.com
Financial status: $150,000 in public funding, $133,654.96 currently in the bank

Publicly funded elections are one of the most positive things to happen in Portland City Hall over the past several decades. Previously, elections were decided based on who had the most money, not who was the best candidate. I want to be elected because of my vision, experience and ideals -- not because I am the most effective fundraiser. I am proud to be running as a “Voter Owned Candidate” and will be happy to put the program to a public vote in 2010. At that point, I will do everything in my power to persuade Portland voters to pass this inspired program.

The best way to promote publicly financed elections will be to have a strong and effective new voice on city council made possible through publicly financed elections. As a Voter Owned Candidate, I understand that I am beholden only to the people of Portland and will always vote accordingly.

Charles Lewis
aka “Five Buck Chuck”

Mike Fahey
Position sought: Commissioner #1
Website: friendsofmikefahey.com
Financial status: $12,230.00 in contributions to date, $5,922.70 currently in the bank

I did not go with public financing for my Portland City Council #1 race because my personal belief is the City of Portland should use that money for funding current programs and services.

The cost for primary and general election will be between 1.5 to 2 million dollars. I feel that the citizen of Portland would be better served if we put 15-20 Portland police officers on the streets doing community policing. The city has seen a rise in gang activity in the past few months and the extra officers would make big impact on the streets of Portland. The Portland police are currently under staffed today by 30 to 50 officers depending on who you talk to. I use this as just one example where the public finance money could be
spent.

The City of Portland income will decrease as the recession gets worse. The big question will be what programs and services will get reduced? How many city employees will get laid off? How many street potholes and sidewalks could we fix with this money?

The Question to ask youself if your children or grandchildren were going to school or playing in the park : who is better trained to protect them, a police officer or a politician?

The citizens of Portland should vote on this issue in 2010 since it is the taxpayers money.

Mike Fahey
Candiate for Portland City Council #1

John Branam
Position sought: Commissioner #1
Website: john4pdx.org
Financial status: $150,000 in public funding, $95,371.36 currently in the bank

I support public financing for Portland city council campaigns. Although there are clear opportunities to improve the form voters complete (that accompanies their $5 contribution,) and despite having some concerns about how the program has been administered, in general I believe its benefits far outweigh the detriments. In sum, I participated because I believe in taking big money and run-away campaign spending out of elections, and because I believed participating would be preferred to the spending my entire campaign raising money. Having gone through the program I still believe that is the case today.

Public financing has had a number of positive impacts on my campaign. First, although I raise money for Portland Public Schools and am very comfortable doing so, not having to spend up to 50% of my time (which most candidates in other races do) “dialing for dollars” has meant, fundamentally, that although I did spend a significant amount of time working to gather signatures and $5 contributions, the majority it was spent actually talking with voters about the issues. From my perspective, this is a strongly preferred outcome for Portlanders.

Second, public funding has changed how people engage with me as we discuss challenges and opportunities. Because they’ve not been able to “buy” promises in exchange for financial support, our conversations, I believe, have been more genuinely focused on how we can work together as a city to accomplish what’s best for Portland.

Third, the system’s threshold requirements encouraged me to get out and meet the voters, early. Although those in my race and in our other city races, relied heavily on mailing and surrogates to gather their signatures, I enjoyed and found meaningful gathering my signatures primarily by going door-to-door by myself. Although I am sure I would have nonetheless sought other reasons to meet voters personally, I do not believe I would have pushed to do so so early, nor in such a significant, and personal, way. Our conversations were genuine and focused on the issues and this, I believe, was/ is one of the system’s goals.

Fourth, again, although because of my work I am familiar with people who have significant resources to support a campaign, trying to run a competitive city-wide campaign for the first time, at a relatively young age and without either a famous last name or deep personal pockets, would be very difficult. And yet I think having people with compelling backgrounds, experiences and ideas, but who don’t necessarily have direct access to big money, running for council is important. Frankly, I think it’s absolutely consistent with our city’s values.

Although there are undoubtedly some changes that should be made in the program’s design, and again despite the concerns I have about the administrative issues, there is one fundamental alteration that stands out in terms of the program’s design: I believe the candidate him or herself should be required to gather 65% of the signatures in person. This, I think, gets at one of the program’s intents. Speed signature gathering by surrogates, however impressive, gets away from this intent and, although it certainly demonstrates organizational skills and a proven network (both of which are important in a campaign and in governing,) it does not help demonstrate that the candidate has had meaningful conversations with those who are not necessarily the more well-connected in Portland.

Finally, in terms of whether I would vote to put the program to a public vote in 2010, the simple answer is “yes.” Although I believe strongly in public funding for city council races and am particularly appreciative that it has existed during my run, I believe its ultimate future should rest in the hands of the voters in 2010.

Jeff Bissonnette
Position sought: Commissioner #1
Website: portlandersforjeff.com
Financial status: $150,000 in public funding, $142,406.89 in the bank pending deposit of $139,855 check from the city

Portland is a place where people believe that problems can be addressed and are interested in coming up with effective solutions. My campaign is fueled by that optimism, knowing we will be able to address any issue that comes before us.

I have always been a very strong supporter of the Voter-Owned Election (VOE) system. Campaign finance reform is a central issue in making sure that democracy remains vital and, yes, sustainable. Many Portlanders are very concerned about the large amount of money spent on campaigns at the federal, state and local levels and want to move beyond politics based on big contributions and sound bites. Rather, they want to focus on issues and problem-solving.

The Voter-Owned Election system provides a vehicle to do just that. I feel extremely fortunate to be able to spend my campaign time talking to voters about issues, ideas and solutions rather than spending the majority of my time asking people for money to run my campaign. As a side benefit, many non-participating candidates are also agreeing to self-imposed spending and contribution caps, helping to reduce special interest influence and bringing the cost of campaigns within reach of more potential candidates.

According to an analysis by Democracy Reform Oregon, more than 10,000 people gave a qualifying $5 contribution to a candidate. As part of that process to qualify publicly-financed candidates, people who had never given to a political campaign, had never held a house party, had never talked to their neighbors about city issues, were willing to start conversations and ask for $5 from fellow Portlanders to enable me and my fellow VOE candidates to interact directly with the voters. Many people who had not previously heard of the Voter-Owned Election system remarked, "This is the way we should do campaigns." Amen to that.

In 2010, after two and a half election cycles, Portlanders will have the experience they need to make an informed decision about whether the VOE system is the right solution to the problem of big money in city campaigns or whether it's time to look at another potential solution. For my part, I will make sure Portlanders have the ability to vote on whether the program should continue or not.

Amanda Fritz
Position sought: Commissioner #1
Website: amandafritzforcitycouncil.com
Financial status: $150,000 in public funding, $136,896.03 currently in the bank

Public Campaign Financing is revolutionary. It has already changed the course of this election, with five great community candidates seeking the open seat being vacated by Sam Adams. The public money you provide gives the citizens of Portland the opportunity to elect a new Commissioner who is dedicated to Portland's values, community service, and integrity. Portlanders have already won by attracting five high quality candidates who do not have to consider whether our policy positions will affect big money campaign donations. I am beholden to the people of Portland. I have worked at the grassroots level on a broad range of City issues in Portland for over 17 years, and I have a proven record of achieving results for Portlanders. If I am elected, I will save Portland citizens the cost of my campaign funding with one vote, for instance by denying a contract to an insider currently awarded City work without a bid process. I will prioritize funding of basic services in all 95 neighborhoods, and coordinate services with Multnomah County, the School Boards, and other jurisdictions. When I seek re-election using public funding in 2012, I will provide a tally to voters, listing where my independence from special interests, and my obligation to the general public, resulted in savings to taxpayers. If I am elected, Portlanders will see before the referendum in 2010 that Public Campaign Financing saves money. This past Tuesday, the filing deadline passed with only one candidate on the ballot for Seat 1 having held elected office before, running using traditional fundraising. In "the olden days", most likely a famous person or career politician would have looked at our field of six and thought, "I could take those guys/that woman", and entered the race -- without true commitment to serving all the citizens of Portland. But five candidates with $150,000 offer a brave new day in Portland politics. All five Public Campaign Finance Fund candidates have earned the right to be heard, even if some media companies or community groups make choices about who deserves extra publicity. The taxpayers of Portland have made a great investment in purifying our election process. Public Campaign Financing is only one component of moving to Voter Owned Elections, but it is a vital cornerstone. I participated in Public Financing because asking people with financial interests in City decisions for significant campaign contributions is incompatible with my moral values. I believe most Portlanders share my principles and support the program. Also, I wanted to make sure that at least one candidate would qualify and follow all the rules in the 2008 election. Portlanders who know me and followed my first campaign trust me. When I ran in 2006, I was the only non-incumbent candidate who demonstrated the community support and ethical standards needed to complete the first Public Campaign Finance Fund campaign. I helped improve the rules in 2006 and 2007. I will work on continued amendments to the program after this election. I will vote to refer the program to voters in November 2010.

This week on Easier Than Reading, join your host Andrew R. Tonry as he gives you a tour of his messy desk and offers all listeners free hair cuts. Plus find out what live music you need to check out this week, and hear tunes from Saul Williams (pictured above), Travis Morrison, Alice Smith, Papercuts, and Modernstate! Listen in right over here.

This race, as you’ll recall, is the one the city council was fighting over yesterday, when it comes to public funding. What do the candidates have to say about the program? LOTS.

The last candidate who turned in more than 1,000 signatures has been certified for public financing. What are your thoughts on the program? Why did you or didn’t you participate? Also, would you vote to put the program to a public vote in 2010?

The only publicly financed candidate in the race, Jim Middaugh, responded first:

Jim Middaugh
Position sought: Commissioner #2
Website: jimforportland.com
Financial status: $150,000 in public funding, $140,253.96 currently in the bank

I am a strong supporter of the city’s Voter Owned Elections — the local system that provides for the public financing of campaigns. Though I had an abbreviated timeline for collecting the qualifying contributions I was able to bring in more than 1,700 in just 10 days using my strong network of grassroots support. Candidates who did not try or did not qualify for public financing for this race clearly do not have a strong local network or they prefer to rely on private contributions.

I am convinced that a commitment to public financing is the best way to ensure that candidates speak for themselves and for the people of Portland, not for contributors who can afford to write big checks.

Nearly every observer of the political process believes that money has a corrupting influence. Just the time commitments of fundraising alone skew the way a candidate spends her or his time, who they talk to, and what kinds of things they are told they should be working on.

Relying on public financing ensures that I am out talking to ordinary people in the course of my campaign, not wealthy contributors who, believe it or not, usually give politicians money for a reason.

No other candidate in this race is using public financing. While I am talking to voters they are busy raising money or they are not running viable campaigns.

The debate in Portland over Voter Owned Elections has been intense, and the early and current flaws in enforcement of the system’s rules have added to the controversy. I support change to the system to ensure that it works smoothly and fairly, but I will oppose those who think that wealthy donors and special interests should have extra influence in shaping a politician’s schedule and priorities.

I will fight to ensure that when public financing is put before voters that the ballot title is fair and accurate and reflects the real benefits associated with eliminating the influence of money in local politics.

Ed Garren
Position sought: Commissioner #2
Website: edforportland.com
Financial status: $810 in contributions, $1,208.36 currently in the bank

Public Campaign financing, and how it has been used so far, has been a mixed benefit to the city.

In the race for seat #2 (the one I'm in), I attempted to go for public financing, but was faced with the daunting task for getting 1,000 (verifiable) $5 contributions in about 20 days. Even with many friends and fellow activists working on the project, we did not come near the required number in that time.

At last count, there are four or five people in this race, and only one qualified for public money, the chief of staff of the incumbent who resigned suddenly and created the vacancy. To add insult to injury, he is praising his "grass roots" effort, which by his account gathered 1,700 contributions in ten (10) days.

Having been a "grass roots" activist for much of my life, I am a bit suspect of his endeavors. We also have a mayoral candidate who did more or less the same thing in a relatively short period of time.

In both of these two incidents, I cannot help but question the outcome. One has to question how "grass roots" the gathering of so many small contributions in such a short time really is.

I have members of my campaign steering committee who are long time organizers, one in labor, another in environmental justice. One is a Portland native, the other, has lived here all of her adult life. They both flatly state that it would be difficult, if not impossible to get 1,700 contributions in ten (10) days without some sort of orchestrated, if not professional assistance.
Added to that is the additional question that this candidate, as the chief of staff of the incumbent who resigned, might not have had prior knowledge of that impending resignation, and the advantages that go along with that prior knowledge, as well as other benefits of working inside city hall for many years.

All is "fair" in love, war and politics, so I do not begrudge the actions per se. But I believe Portland voters are intelligent and informed enough to ask the important questions about honesty, integrity the long term trustworthiness of any candidate who would hijack a process meant to help genuine "grass roots" candidates (like the ones in the race for seat #1 who had months to gather contributions, not days).

As a taxpayer, I have serious issues about publicly financing the candidacies of two people who clearly have had access to power and opportunities that the rest of us do not have.

As an alternative to the current system, perhaps a significant spending cap on all races might be a better solution. I personally think that if all the candidates ran without major advertisements, without the hype and polish of carefully scripted campaigns, expensive consultants, glossy full color brochures (which take a lot of trees and carbon to produce and distribute) in an environment that encouraged voters to actually engage the process, our electoral process might be better served.

But sadly, the two situations that I describe above, demonstrate that the most well intended of situations can be co-opted, and not deliver the benefit that was intended.

Ed Garren,
Candidate for Portland City Council, seat #2
www.edforportland.com

Harold C. Williams Two
Position sought: Commissioner #2
Website: none
Financial status: $300 in contributions, $300 currently in the bank

The public financing program is a very well thought out program. I did not participate in program because of time restraints. As far as voting to put the program to a public vote in 2010, the answer is YES.

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

Nick Fish
Position sought: Commissioner #2
Website: nickfish2008.com
Financial status: $22,500.01 in contributions, $17,372.93 currently in the bank

Public financing can be a force to expand the number of people involved in the decisions that affect our families, and I support it in Portland. In fact, I have been a strong supporter of fundamental campaign finance reform at the federal, state and local level, including a requirement that broadcasters offer free time to candidates. I am proud of the fact that my show, Outlook Portland with Nick Fish, featured candidates for office, including those who are ignored by the media.

The current system, though well-intentioned, is flawed. At the top of the list, was that the system, which takes over $1million from the general fund was never approved by the voters. To those who feel that their tax dollars are subsidizing candidates they don’t agree with, we at least owed them a right to vote on the system.

Many of the public financing systems cited to by advocates of public financing in Portland – Maine and Arizona, for example – were adopted by voters and not by elected officials.

Not surprisingly, Commissioners Adams, Saltzman and Leonard who voted for instituting the system have opted not to take public funds for their campaigns.

Should I win this election, I will push for a vote on the system. If the voters pass it, I will gladly opt in to a system that has been given the voters’ stamp of approval.

In the meantime, I will limit my spending in the May election to $150,000, the amount which a publicly-financed candidate would receive under the system. In limiting my fundraising, I’m abiding by the spirit of public financing.

The final candidate in the race, Fred Stewart, did not respond.

Okay. Let’s try this again. Also, this looks pretty great.

Oh, geez… look what I’ve started. I post about Amanda Fritz’ bikey lawn sign delivery, and—not to be outdone—this lands in my inbox from the John Branam campaign:

CITY COUNCIL JOHN BRANAM CELEBRATES 300 LAWN SIGNS and A NEW THEME SONG

Last Thursday, March 6, the John Branam campaign planted its first lawn sign—and the first lawn sign of the city council campaign season.

Another 299 lawn signs were delivered (mostly by foot) over the weekend with a team of volunteers who were fueled by Voodoo Donuts. The signs are union-made, recyclable and quite possible edible (although we hereby issue a preemptive disclaimer on their taste and/or digestibility).

Also, the John Branam campaign is proud to announce its campaign theme song, “Lightning” by the Retrofits. Lead by keyboardist and 2000 mayoral candidate Jake Oken-Berg, the Retrofits can be caught this Friday at the Doug Fir.

Anybody else?

Speaking of Branam and Fritz! A Branam supporter reports she was polled last night by McGuire Research about the race to replace Sam Adams on the city council.

The most interesting thing about the poll? After identifying the candidates in that race—Fritz, Branam, Chris Smith, Jeff Bissonnette, and Charles Lewis, but not Mike Fahey—and asking whether the voter’s views were favorable or unfavorable, the pollster said “‘Wow, you’re the first person I’ve talked to who’s actually had a clue,’” says the voter she called—who asked that her name not be used, so as not to get the pollster who went off script into trouble. “That to me was pretty telling.”

Indeed, I wonder what it says about how the national presidential election is overshadowing our just as interesting—if not more so—local races.

More about the poll after the cut!

Other than the infamous Dozono poll, I believe this may be the first poll commissioned by a publicly financed candidate. Given the limited funds a publicly financed candidate has—and the hefty bill a pollster can deliver—it's interesting to see what's asked, and how valuable the answers might be to a candidate running in a race packed with five solid publicly financed candidates.

The poll's questions—which took about 15 minutes to answer—were positive.

"She went through and said a sentence about each of the candidate's backgrounds, asked if I knew such and such about these people would I find them more favorable, less favorable, the same," says the voter—who, as someone supporting Branam, paid close attention to the questions. Lewis was pegged as someone who started a non-profit after school program, and Smith as a high tech employee focused on improving transportation,. Branam was acknowledged as a fundraiser for Portland Public Schools, and Fritz a nurse, community activist, and former member of the planning commission.

"After that, she went through that series of questions, another serious of questions on all of the candidates, their mission statements or key position policy statements," the voter says. "John's was improving public education and getting more city council involvement in Portland Public Schools

Here's where the poll started leaning toward one candidate in particular, the voter says. "Everyone else was like one short thing, and Amanda's was ten ideas encapsulated into one sentence. After that they went into about 10 different statements about Amanda Fritz specifically. If you knew she was considered a leader by her peers for her work in the planning commission. That she helped create four new parks in Portland."

The voter says that the poll, though it seemed to clearly lean toward Fritz—"I asked who was paying for it, and [the pollster] said she didn't know," the voter says—the poll never veered into the negative.

She was also asked if she supported Mayor Tom Potter, and if she were to vote today, who'd she vote for.

A volunteer at the Fritz office confirmed it was a Fritz poll, though the campaign's spokesperson wasn't available. Once I hear back from him, I'll update if he's willing to share any more information about the poll, like how many people were called.

UPDATE @ 8pm: "We'll have the poll info out when it has been completed and analyzed," campaign spokesperson Bill Michtom says via email. "As usual, if it's from Amanda, it's clear and honest."

Arizona consultant Eileen Luna-Firebaugh will now present her controversial report on the Independent Police Review to city council next Wednesday, after all.

LUNA-FIREBAUGH: Pictured, right, with her husband, in Portland last December…

Luna-Firebaugh is the author of a report released in January, saying the public doesn’t trust Portland’s police review process. She’s a professor of criminology and used to run the Berkeley Police Review, among others.

As of yesterday, she still didn’t have plane tickets to come and present her report here in Portland, triggering concerns about how many of her recommendations might be acted upon by council, or whether they might be inclined to ignore much of her criticism.

“I am very pleased to be coming to Portland to deliver the report,” she tells the Mercury, having got an email yesterday evening from the mayor’s office, asking her to come.

Luna-Firebaugh will miss a Tuesday work session, when city council will discuss her report without taking public comment. She plans to arrive that evening at 11:30 to present to council the following morning, Wednesday March 19.

Predator as told via a six-minute-long hiphop track?

Sign me up.

Thanks, Gorilla Mask.

I’m a little late in blogging this: The 2008 Tournament of Books started last week. It’s already in the fourth match of the first round. Sorry, sorry, but the first round is the least interesting, anyway, as it seems somewhat-to-very obvious which books will advance to the next bracket. (Pitting Denis Johnson’s National Book Award-winning Tree of Smoke against Jeff Parker’s funny and charming but ultimately disposable Ovenman was just mean.)

The tournament asks a handful of judges to read two books, and decide which one they prefer; the winner advances to the next round. So far, in addition to Tree of Smoke, Vendela Vida’s Let the Northern Lights Erase Your Name, Joshua Ferris’ Then We Came to the End, Jonathan Lethem’s You Don’t Love Me Yet (this one VERY grudgingly, only ‘cause the other book was deemed worse) have made it through the first round.

It’s fun ‘cause usually nerds don’t get to bet on things.

Check in over at The Morning News to follow the action. I hope somebody eliminates the Johnson book just for the hell of it, and makes the contest a little more interesting.

Multnomah County’s commitment court ruled two years ago an alleged mentally ill person should be locked in a psychiatric hospital because there was a risk she might be “beaten to death” by cops like James Chasse, if she were left to wander the streets, it was revealed yesterday.

DANGER TO YOURSELF: SOME OTHERS…

The appeals court yesterday overturned the woman’s involuntary commitment, saying the conclusion that she “was a danger to herself because some officer, at some unknown point in the future, might kill or harm her is unduly speculative and does not establish, by clear and convincing evidence, that appelant is a danger to herself.”

The woman had fought with police when she was originally taken into custody on a mental health hold. So the commitment court said that “fighting with police…is certainly something that puts mentally ill people at risk of death or serious physical injury,” according to the appeals court verdict.

“The court commented on the then-recent death of James Chasse, stating that Chasse, an unarmed mentally ill person, “was confronted by police, and he was beaten to death.”,” the appeals court verdict continues.

Nevertheless, that’s not her fault, according to the appeals court.

It’s significant that the commitment court took “absolute judicial notice” of the fact that “fighting with the police” is “certainly something that puts mentally ill people at risk of death or serious physical injury,” because in legal terms, a judge would only take judicial notice of a fact when it is obvious and undisputed.

For example, a judge might take judicial notice of the fact that the Mercury is an alternative weekly newspaper, or of the fact that the sun set yesterday just after 7pm. For a judge to take “absolute judicial notice” of the fact that mentally ill people are at risk of being beaten to death by police is a strong position.

More after the jump.

Usually, a person is ruled a danger to themselves or others because of, for example: repeated suicide attempts, or thinking bleach is a magic drink sent from heaven, or for carrying a knife around and believing they are on a divine quest, or believing they are impervious to gunfire. Simply having a tendency to fight with police isn't sufficient, says the appeals court. You can read more about the commitment process here.

The appeals court verdict is unlikely to help the person who was committed, however. She has already spent up to 180 days in the psychiatric hospital, and has no legal recourse. 23 commitments in Multnomah County have been overturned by the appeals court since December 2006, either because the Commitment Court had insufficient evidence to commit the person, or simply because procedures weren't followed. In one case, a commitment was overturned because it was held "in the hallway of a hospital while appellant was naked in a hospital room, in the midst of a medical crisis, and unable to hear or participate meaningfully in the entire proceeding."

Critics of the system say civil commitment should not be used as a dumping ground for a failed public safety or mental health system. They argue that you can't just lock people up because society doesn't want to take care of them, or because it doesn't know how to.

So here’s the long awaited (at least by me) video for “Break the Ice” off Britney Spear’s Blackout CD—and while I love the song, the video is brilliant on a number of levels. 1) Since it’s all done in Japanimation “Aeon Flux” style, we don’t actually have to see and be depressed by Brit’s burrito bump. 2) And since it’s Japanimation, it automatically gives me seizures—making sure I don’t have time to remember that Britney is currently under her dad’s house arrest. And 3) What if this video is actually what’s going on in Britney’s brain? That she’s actually experiencing this stuff in her mind, a’la The Matrix? That would explain SO MUCH of her behavior. (But wait… what if Britney’s not actually real and I’M the one experiencing an imagined universe? Ohh, wowwww. I need to smoke some pot.)

More musical fun and the latest SXSW updates at End Hits!

Biwa is celebrating their first anniversary with a one-day only burger special:

In 1950 an American named Johnny Wetzstein opened Japan’s first hamburger restaurant, “The Hamburger Inn- No.1 Tokyo Hamburger,” in the Roppongi neighborhood of Tokyo. In the following sixty years the Japanese have come to embrace the hamburger, along with other uniquely American inventions like Hip-Hop and blue jeans, and have even helped it to adapt to its new home via innovations like McDonalds Japan’s “shrimp burger” or Mosburger’s “Mosburger” (a probably pretty tasty concoction of beef patty sandwiched between a “bun” of compressed rice).

In this spirit we would love to have you here at Biwa on Saturday March 15th to help us celebrate our first anniversary with what we hope to have become an annual tradition: the only available one day a year “Biwa Burger!”

I hope it becomes an annual tradition too! Many happy returns, Biwa. I also hope that you bring back lunch, because then we could go there NOW, and I wouldn’t have to listen to Courtney and Erik whine like little bitches about how they can’t agree on where to eat.

Biwa, 215 SE 9th, and don’t forget about their excellent happy hour: $5 ramen and udon from 9 pm close, plus a $2 yakitori menu and cheap beer/sake from 5-6:30 daily, or anytime if you sit at the bar.

Other candidates in the race for the open seat that Sam Adams is vacating may be getting their lawn signs out there (or, perhaps not—I thought I saw one for Chris Smith today, next to a Jim Middaugh one, but it turned out to be a placard for a Smith security company), but Amanda Fritz has put a new twist on the sign delivery: Hers are heading out on bikes, Portland style.

More specifically, Fritz has 30 cyclists ready to distribute her lawn signs this coming Sunday.

A Campaign That Bikes Makes for a Healthier Portland

Amanda Fritz, candidate for Portland City Commissioner Position # 1, will have more than 30 cyclists deliver over 150 yard signs to supporters via bicycle, this Sunday, March 16.

Amanda believes that bicycling is a vital part of making Portland ecologically and economically sustainable, and, they’re just plain fun.

If you want to help, the campaign office is at 3525 NE Broadway, and Fritz’ team is meeting up at 12:30 pm “for good, clean, ecologically-sustainable fun.”

Sooooooo… last night Jim Carrey was in the American Idol audience, dressed up like an elephant to promote his uninspiring turn in Horton Hears a Who. If you like incredibly awkward whoring, then you are going to LOVE this. (Note to Hollywood celebs: Doing stupid cross-promotions and winking to the audience that you KNOW you’re selling out doesn’t make you any less of a sell out.)

Both sides of the contentious discussion over the city’s Independent Police Review sat down last night to discuss its future in a foreshadowing of council discussions early next week.

L to R: City auditor Gary Blackmer, Citizens Review Committee Chair Michael Bigham, Copwatch Activist Dan Handelman, Former NW Constitutional Rights Center Executive Director Alejandro Queral.

This issue is complex. It’s not simply