First of all, we need to establish a club called “Pounding Pints of IPA to Prepare for Public Portland Plan Presentations.” We will drink. Then we will attend public meetings. We will find the city’s Powerpoint presentations not only tolerable but highly amusing.
It might have been the pint of something Belgian I had before the first official public input session on the Portland Plan last night at Beaumont Middle School, but the two and a half hour meeting felt, well, good. It mostly felt very, very, very Portland. Like this sugary-smug National Geographic article about how everything in Portland is friendly, sustainable and “fashionably eclectic”. It felt like that. Only in real life. It was a bizarrely polite and upbeat 2.5 hour discussion about the steep challenges our city will face over the next 25 years, hosted in a way that would have made National Geographic’s Intelligent Traveler blush with joy.
Exhibit A: The sign outside the door.

Exhibit B: 
Exhibit C: We love public process, especially if it can involve our iPhones.
“This is about ‘groundtruthing’ and ‘crowdsourcing’,” said Mayor Adams, listing the Twitter and Facebook pages where the public could get involved and then doing his trademark “Mayor Sam wades into the crowd and takes citizen comments” move.
Commissioner Fish was also on hand tell the standing-room only crowd "it's all about you." Fish framed the plan as a completely bottom-up vision for the city, as opposed to the current Portland Plan, which was written exclusively by city bureaus back in 1980. “The Portland Plan and the process we are launching tonight is not about Sam Adams’ vision, it is about your vision. This process has been structured to be about you,” said Fish.
Exhibit D: Overlooking the homeless. The comment of the night goes to the young guy who noted that the word “homelessness” is almost entirely absent from the Portland Plan. He’s right. Though the plan discusses things that contribute to homelessness, like lack of affordable housing and economic development, the word “homeless” appears exactly twice: the very bottom of page 16 calls out the Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness under “Related Reports” and then on page 24, there’s a link to that plan.
But shouldn’t dealing with homelessness be an integral part of a comprehensive plan for city in the state that ranks #1 for homelessness per capita in the nation?

Exhibits E through H below the cut.
Exhibit E: The crowd was mostly white, mostly older and mostly progressive. According to a highly technological computer-gizmo survey of the crowd (Exhibit E-1), 75 percent of the audience was white, 32 percent have a household income over $100,000 and only 33 percent were under 40.
Yeah, there were a couple comments along the lines of Jim Karlock’s old refrain (“Why are aren't we encouraging people to use small cars instead of public transit?!”) and a senior citizen who was a spitting image of Granny Franny who wants the city to be quieter (“Especially those boomboxes in cars”) but all in all, people brought up some sharp points about the need for more affordable housing, mass transit and how we’re going to pay for things like the bike master plan.
Exhibit F: They love bikes.
When asked to name what should be the top priority for city transportation funds over the coming decades, the most popular answer was bike facilities. Bam! When asked to name “one new thing you’re willing to do to reduce energy use to help combat climate change” the most popular answer was “walk, bike and use transit.” Bam again!
Exhibit G: An entire table-full of glossy paper explaining how we can become the nation's most sustainable city.

Showing 1-7 of 7
Smirk:
I think Karlock's refrain is "Why AREN'T we encouraging people to use small cars instead of public transit."
And it's not an old refrain, it is a TIRED old refrain.
thanks for the typo catch, pdxMB. A funny moment last night came when Adams mentioned that the cameras in the room were for cable tv and then saw Jim and said, "Actually, this is Jim Karlock, who’s taping for himself."
"Groundtruthing?"
REALLY?
REAAAALLY?!?!
Wow.
Also: “The Portland Plan and the process we are launching tonight is not about Sam Adams’ vision, it is about your vision. This process has been structured to be about you,” said Fish.
How is this different from Tom Potter's costly "Visioning" product?
Of course it's about YOU. As long as you are:
"White, 32 percent have a household income over $100,000 and only 33 percent were under 40"
You can hide in your microbrew pubs, 'green' buildings and Pearl condos behind gates and guards and feel good about yourselves because of your intentions, despite the actual results.
You can also roll up the windows of your Prius' as the armies of change bummers and junkies line up to swap shifts at the corner and in front of the empty storefronts.
It would be amazing if any of these people actually walked the downtown streets today and took a look.
Question for Blogtown: How do you guys think these meetings are going to change the ultimate Plan they come up with?
In other words, if they just wrote the Plan right now based on masturbatory planner group-think orthodoxy, or if they wait and write the Plan after this process, how specifically do you think they two products would differ? As you can probably guess, my bet is that they wouldn't differ in any substantial way.
And Sarah, you should really be a planner. I can guarantee that your dismissive response to the couple of people who didn't share your politics is precisely how the planners in the room were reacting. Planners are great listeners just as long as your telling them what they already think they know.
Dear Ms. Mirk,
Thank you for helping me point out that the word "homelessness" and the idea of "homelessness" are missing from the Portland Plan. I'm not an active homelessness advocate (although this may turn me into one), but when I read the Portland Plan for fifteen minutes on the way to the meeting, I was quickly transformed into a concerned citizen. After the meeting, I tracked down Nick Fish and asked him why it didn't end up in the plan. He couldn't explain the omission, but he invited me into his office to discuss it. I'm currently in the process of scheduling that appointment. I'll be sure to keep you updated.
Thank you again,
Alexander Johnson
Comments (7) RSS