I know, I know. That sounds like a remarkably divisive question, coming from a columnist who recently professed a desire to have the Commissioner's babies.
Actually, I still do want to have Nick Fish's babies—WHATEVER HIS WIFE THINKS. But occasional Mercury freelancer Amanda Waldroupe has a fascinating feature in this week's Street Roots, grilling Fish on why he doesn't want to push Portland voters for a housing levy in 2010, like the one Seattle voters recently passed again.
Bobby Weinstock, a housing specialist at Northwest Pilot Project, is quoted in the article: “We ask for [levies for] things that are important to people like the libraries and the zoo and school buildings," he says.
In Seattle, the owner of a $450,000 home contributes just $79 per year toward the levy. Thing is, Fish says, it's going to take at least three years before he pushes for a similar idea here. Meanwhile, he's pushing for a parks levy on the 2010 ballot, and says: "there’s a bunch of other community priorities that have been identified."
Nevertheless, asking him to choose between housing and parks is like "asking [him] to choose between [his] children," Fish says. But it seems to me like he just CHOSE BETWEEN HIS CHILDREN.
Perhaps he needs to have a few more children. By me. Digressing.
Go read the Street Roots piece. There's also a poll on their Facebook page, asking whether you'd support a housing levy. But since today is POLL day in the Mercury news room, I'm going to ask you straight up whether you would prefer a parks levy or an affordable housing levy in 2010. Let's give Fish a little democratic feedback. FROM THE KIDS.
Parks levy, or affordable housing levy in 2010?