"If this measure passes, the ownership of the Portland water system gets transferred to a government that a few people might be able to control."

In other words ... exactly what we already have right now.

I personally see pros and cons to the PPWD.

Either way I endorse the upcoming Trust initiative to fix all loopholes.

Judge Stephen Bushong’s question, “Then what’s the limitation?” of the City Council’s discretion cuts to the heart of the controversy. Whilst the Council has the responsibility of ensuring that public water supplies are suitable for purpose, that purpose does not stretch to adding any form of chemical substance to that water in order to attempt to treat the public for any form of disease. Does the Council have the right to add statins to the water, to prevent heart disease and strokes in the elderly, or lithium to prevent depression of those who cannot face up to the stresses of modern life? Or even registered drugs to reduce aggression in the unruly section of the population that objects to the Council's authoritarian approach to the management of the public? Ethically enlightened societies accept that such interventions are the exclusive role of those qualified to make medical judgments for individual consenting patients. They have put in place legislative frameworks that exclude arbitrary actions of public medication from being imposed on the public. The Council should stick to its proper remit and not attempt to usurp the roles and responsibilities of the medical sector.

I'm curious to know what union jobs would be lost under this proposal, and wondering if these jobs could be lost, then why are we paying for them now?

The water bureau certainly needs is a top to bottom shakeup of management, but I don't think this is the way to do it.