Earlier today, the Portland Business Alliance released its first candidate questionnaire for this fall’s runoff election, a 15-question survey given out to Mary Nolan and Amanda Fritz earlier this summer. The whole thing, posted online by the PBA, is worth a read. But here’s my impression: Nolan comes off a little better than Fritz, an incumbent who swore off big donations despite Nolan’s fundraising prowess.
In the first question, on whether “job creation” should be a top city priority, Fritz flatly says “No,” before launching into a nuanced explanation of why. Her argument is that focusing on basic municipal services is more important, even though she also does still support, she says, taking step to attract and retain new businesses. It’s not terrible, if anyone bothers to read the rest of what she said. The problem is they may not. And that her “no” will be way too tempting of a target for a Nolan attack ad this fall. Nolan’s response doesn’t allow for such parsing. Hers was just “Yes.”
Fritz also took a dig at Nolan, in a question on public employee benefits, noting that “it is not surprising to me that the Police and Fire Unions are supporting my opponent.” She hasn’t done much of that before, usually preferring to talk about her own record exclusively. Interestingly, when asked later about public safety and whether candidates would commit to not laying off cops, it was Nolan, the police union’s chosen candidate, who actually had the less-firm response.
I agree that public safety is a top priority for City residents and businesses alike, and I would like to commit without reservation to maintaining current sworn capacity. But if General Fund resources continue to lose buying power due to constitutional limits or pressure for tax or fee reductions, that objective may not be achievable. CHIERS and the Service Coordination Team are vitally important programs for which I support continuing funding.
Nolan’s response is interesting for another reason. It’s a tartly sly way of putting the PBA on notice that, at the same time as the group keeps asking for tax and fee cuts, they might want to also consider what kinds of things those taxes and fees pay for. Things like cops.
My most favorite part of the whole survey was the PBA’s question on downtown livability. It’s okay for clean, housed people with small dogs and bags of belongings (go shopping!) to enjoy a public sidewalk. It’s not okay, however, if those same clean people with dogs and bags are unhoused.
Portland has one of the best downtowns in the nation, but we constantly hear from local residents and visitors who find our downtown streets unwelcoming because of the transients who are allowed to sit on sidewalks, frequently with their dogs and belongings, sometimes engaging in aggressive panhandling. How will you address this persistent livability issue? Would you support a stronger sit-lie ordinance? And do you support maintaining – and enforcing – the city’s prohibition against camping?
Sticking the word “sometimes” before “aggressive panhandling” is telling. Even if a “transient” is acting perfectly politely and decently and privately, the PBA would still rather they weren’t “allowed” to sit on the public right of way.
Both Fritz and Nolan defend the current sidewalk plan that, nominally, “allows” homeless people to be on the street. Fritz oversees that plan, in fact. Nolan’s response comes uncomfortably close to endorsing sweeps of low-impact camps, which the city mostly ignores right now. However, she also got in a good line about making sure the city has money for an even better answer to having cops and private security harass the homeless: Paying for safety net programs—hey, look, more taxes and fees!—that take care of people before they attract the attention of those in uniform.
According to the O, which focused on other issues in their writeup this morning, neither candidate has the PBA’s endorsement yet.
I wonder what’s the current situation with PBA’s rent-a-cops? what powers do they have and what oversight is there of their shenanigans?
I feel like there was another blog post I should have put this comment under, but maybe that was somewhere else.
We need more hustling and busking homeless and less lie around with a pitbull and black carharts homeless.
This story further proves that the PBA is a bunch of fascists.
As if I needed another reason to despise the PBA.
I don’t mind them sitting on the sidewalk as long as they leave a place to walk but can we please stop them from urinating on the sidewalk (and themselves). Downtown is starting to smell like a well used piss bottle.
I guess ask for more loo funding?
Having sidewalks that are clear from people camping out on them (at the very least during the business hour time) is not anti-homeless. Portland has plenty of homeless non-profits where people can go inside of or in their courtyards during this time, as well as parks. Even the homeless services have signs outside their doorways adjacent to sidewalks saying “no loitering/camping.”
Nobody’s calling them “fascist,” it’s just common sense not to have camping or sitting on the sidewalks. If it’s a problem, the city can install some benches. Portland’s sidewalks are also very small compared to other cities. Add in sprawled out legs, an aggressive pit-bull and a backpack and you can see the problem at hand.
Somebody is going to trip and they will sue the city.
This is not an anti-homeless initiative (Sidewalk Management Plan); it’s a common sense plan to making the streets safer and more inviting.
The homeless who are sitting on the sidewalk are begging for change for drugs.
The other homeless population is too mentally ill to beg for change, and is probably randomly walking around the city aimlessly. Let’s give them the attention and send the beggars to drug rehab where they can overcome their addictions instead of being enabled by the tourists and bleeding hearts.
I and many other people don’t go downtown much for some of these problems. I’d go there way more but get too annoyed being asked for change every 5 minutes, not to mention the 4 hypodermic needles I have found in tourist spots, and stay on the eastside. A lot of people do this too, but they won’t admit it.
Soon DTP will be a for “lease sign.” And we’ll all know why, too.
I work downtown and this is how virtually every exchange has gone down with me and a kid beggar:
Kid- spare change?
Me- no, sorry.
Kid- no problem, have a good day.
They are always cordial and have some of the most well behaved dogs I have encountered. In Seattle the same scenario happened frequently, but my refusals often led to me getting cussed out and sometimes even followed.
These kids are an eyesore, but a typically well behaved eyesore. Where is all the intimidation people keep complaining about?
Dennis makes me want to swear allegiance to the bones of Ronald Reagan.
In no way is the PBA implying that it’s not okay for “clean, house[less] people with small dogs and bags of belongings to enjoy a public sidewalk.”
The problem in downtown Portland is transients sleeping, defecating and urinating all over the sidewalks, while aggressively panhandling and scaring away shoppers.
The problem is that Portland has a permissive culture with the homeless and an easily accessible supply of heroin. Youth homeless flock here to use our drugs and harass our citizens. This isn’t a case of tragic homelessness and sad, old men drowning their PTSD or schizophrenia in a bottle of Mickey’s. This is a pervasive and structural problem in which degenerates can impose themselves and their addictions on the good people of Portland.
So your stereotyping all the homeless people now; just to fit into your neato anti-homeless person stereotype?
Wow; you’re such a very nice person. <--- Sarcasm; since you're a fucking toolbag "degenerate"; falafelstomper. I lived downtown for 6 years; never once had a problem with homeless people following and harassing me ever. I get harassed more from Beavertronion bro-girls/bro-mans that hang out near Dirty on weekends. Those people are the fucking worst!