Water rates up by 18%, or water AND sewer rates up by 18% I wonder. I ask because sewer rates are 3 times per unit what the water rate is.

Water is dang expensive round these parts

Yeah, out of this article, the water rate hike sticks out the most for me. I guess the yard is goin' brown this year.

Other choice bits:
They cut $25,000 for an "electric car race"

I feel like we're really missing out. Couldn't we just cut another job and have the "electric car race" after all?

For those who give a darn, the $2.5 million for a "pre-development" agreement with Paulson could pay for probably 25 of those lost jobs.

"Water is dang expensive round these parts"
It sure as fuck is. When I lived in Arizona water cost practically zilcho with no charge for removal of sewage and it is a fuggin desert. It's brown lawns for everyone Blabbs. Otherwise this seems like a bang up job by Sammy and the Gang.

The $2.5 million cannot be used for the jobs that were cut. The $2.5 million, however, is part of a plan that will create new jobs not in City Hall.

I've heard there were a ton of layoffs at Planning too.

Your headline implies that people are losing their jobs because of the soccer deal. Your story says otherwise. Can't let a grudge go can you?

Minnie, you mean the $2.5 million will go to create new minimum wage jobs at PGE park which the taxpayer will have to supplement, like we currently do with PGE park jobs?

We're going into debt for these stadiums. Quite a bit of debt. The money that comes back will be less than the money we spend. Your love of soccer does not make this a good deal for the taxpayer, nor will it ever make it a good deal.

For clarification: We're looking into it for yet more clarity, but the spectator facilities fund was established to pay for renovations to sports stadiums and the like. So Adams is correct in that he can't just take $2.5million and spend it on cops. On the other hand, of course, Adams is the mayor, so if he really wanted to, he could probably figure out a way to change the law around the fund.

We have a call into the fund's manager, who is on vacation until Monday, to check it out.

Steady, tsk-tsk so defensive that you come across as paranoid. Matt's headline implies nothing of the sort. It's simply two items he felt were noteworthy, and thus headline worthy about the budget. At least that's how I interpreted them.

Blabby. You rock.

As for the water and sewer rate increase. Well, that's what happens in a City with an imbalanced and shaky tax and revenue structure. Too much spending on things like the Big Pipe project, then caught off guard with not enough revenue to cover it + sudden dip in economy = huge budget shortfall for city = rate increases. Or at least that's my understanding of it.

Portland is progressive, sure. But entirely regressive when it comes to finance.

The gospel according to Blabby - it can't be a good idea because it's supporting sports, and I don't want my tax money to go towards anything that puts the city further into debt. This despite the fact that jobs will be created and more than just the minimum wage ones you talk about, and it will help the profile of the city.

At least Blabby is above board on his hate of the deal, and I can understand his reasons. Why Mr. Davis continues to trash this deal with his other connections is a mystery to me.

Suz,
The Bureau of Planning and Sustainability is slated to lay off 6.5 people, but they're also hiring 15.5 people so altogether they're GAINING nine jobs... though it sucks for the six people who are laid off initially - it's not clear in the budget whether they'll be hired back for the new positions. The "big layoffs in planning" you heard about might be the 55 positions (35 of them vacant) cut from the Bureau of Development Services.

I was wondering if Merc readers are contributing to the OregonLive blog. I feel there's a fight there. From transportation to morality to posts implying a disdain of corruption at all levels of government.

Our little sex scandal obviously isn't going away, so some fact axes that could be used are:

1) Bush changed a law in 2002 to make kissing "sexual contact" (I think this is true, may have been changed)
2) Bush sent 62 17 year-olds to Iraq in 2005 (I think)
3) We're still seen as Little Beirut even though we lost to Houston (I assume)

Is it worth it to go down this channel? I think so.

I always seem to get to these things way to late.

318.

Happy May Day Portland. Got anything in the works for Cinco de Mayo?

Scratch one excuse off the soccer NIMBY's bitch list: homeless funding.

DemonJuice,

You're using the term "NIMBY" incorrectly. NIMBY stands for Not In My Back Yard. As in, don't put a homeless shelter, garbage dump, or power plant next to my house. Even though my life depends on these facilities, I could never bear to live next to one.

The people who are opposed to the soccer stadium (like me), don't care about the proximity of the stadium to their home. We just don't want the damn thing built with public money.

So, please use correct terminology in the future, if you feel compelled to spout ignorant comments about how there's no real risk to taxpayers, and good ol' Mr. Paulson is going to personally guarantee every last penny for this project.

Ex city employee - The Big Pipe project was necessary and legally required by the EPA. It also will allow for future growth and will in the long run reduce sewage rates.

Abusive - Arizona (like most of the SW states) gets most of its water from the Colorado and some from aquifers (sp?) that aren't rapidly replenished in a desert. The environmental impact of these is very high (as one can see from the Colorado river delta) and not represented in the cost of water NOT because water is cheap but because Arizona residents are cheap (having lived there myself I know that many people, especially in the Phoenix area won't pay for a higher cost of water.) Portland may receive a lot of rain but keeping beaver fever out is expensive.

Abusive,
If your water in Arizona cost next to nothing it means somebody else in America was paying for it.
You're welcome.

I don't believe I said anything about taxpayers or risk because I use NIMBY to mean anybody that doesn't want to pay for improvements for their city via aforementioned taxes.

So perhaps my ignorance was in expecting Blogtown readers to not be so rigidly literal in their reading comprehension, although it does seem like you got my point so maybe I was correct in assuming you would be able to.

You seem to be one of those to whom I was referring, although maybe you've never used the homeless funding excuse... I don't know or care to find out.

Relax DemonJuice, I was just busting your balls.

You're right in asserting that the meaning of the term "NIMBY" is not the big issue here. The big issue is whether the City is using public money wisely, and correctly prioritizing City projects and services.

The $2.5 million included in this budget for soccer appears to be coming from a very specific pot of money raised through Rose Quarter ticket taxes to pay for spectator facilities (like PGE park). So, it seems like this is a very appropriate use of the money, and there are very few other projects that the money could be used for (other than early repayment of the outstanding debt for the PGE park renovations).

Unless of course, the City is playing a shell game, transferring money from the General Fund into the Spectator Facilities Operating Fund to keep up the appearance that the soccer project isn't diverting money from basic services... but this detailed budget information isn't available to the public yet, so I guess we'll just have to trust Sam Adams and take his word for it.

You trust Sam Adams, don't you?