City Approves Updated Proposal for Security Patrol on Central Eastside

Comments

1

I think you mean “homeless.”

2

"It’s a proposal that initially rattled advocates for the houseless community, who predicted the security guards would be tasked with harassing people who regularly camp in the neighborhood."

Real meaning: "Businesses and residents are fed up with illegal camps, piles of garbage, rampant and open-air drug use, scattered used needles, piles of human waste, RATS, fighting, and stacks of stripped stolen bike frames littering out city streets. As law-abiding, taxpaying citizens, they demand that the city simply ENFORCE laws. Homeless advocates decry evil NIMBYs without actually addressing any of the issues mentioned above. The Portland Mercury, local mouthpiece for extremist organizations, publishes homeless advocates talking points and writes article to sway public opinion by leaving out key facts to sugarcoat the real homeless problem, while at the same time selling and publishing ads that said evil businesses buy, and said evil residents utilize, to fund their very existence as a "news" paper."

3

I’ve been finding myself sometimes agreeing with Hardesty, which really creeps me out! The city can’t collect the garbage? WTF? We have the “gig” economy, I guess the “gig” government is next. The police and fire department personnel can carry credit card swipes in case you want “enhanced” services. You want streetlights, parks, and usable streets? Service charges, please. I’ve seen privately funded garbage receptacles in the Pearl overflowing after the city promised (he,he) to empty. Why are we so stupid to put up with this?
Also how about holding meetings on the weekends? Weekday meetings are easily packed with homeless advocates while everyone else works. No wonder they seem to drive the agenda.

4

Zielinski is one of the most dedicated activist reporters on the mercury staff. Nothing; no facts, no common sense or reason will dissuade her from her mission to push her anti-cop, nazis around every corner agenda. She has authored most every anti-cop screed in this paper and has yet to retract or offer an apology for anything she has gotten wrong (which is a lot).

How ridiculous is it that the Mercury thinks of itself as an “alternative” weekly. Wouldn’t it be refreshing if they had someone with a different viewpoint for once? Someone that could give voice to the thousands of politically moderate working citizens that pay the majority of the cities taxes, consume its foods and services and educate their children in the cities schools?

Fat chance. There can be only one narrative.