Matt, while I hesitate to provide you with more grist for your wedge opinions re: housing vs parks, what I told you was there are strategic considerations based on polling and other factors that are considered when deciding in what order bond measures proceed. A bond for parks has, in fact, been in the queque for at least 4 years. I also told you that park and housing advocates have worked collaboratively for years invluding park advocates helping housers get a 30% set aside for affordable housing in urban renewal areas. What, you can't bring yourself to write about us cooperating? Not as satisfying as divide and squabble?

Mike

I think this editorial was misplaced on the news page. Or maybe it was supposed to go in New Column: Matt Davis' Righteous Crusade. Is your ax that dull? Do you really have to grind it that hard?

you know who else puts affordable housing before parks, "housing projects"

i like parks a lot. but portland has no shortage of parks, while there is a serious lack of affordable housing. but then again, yuppies and developers like parks more than affordable housing, so guess which one will get built first.

Matt, Tell Mike Houck to take a hike in one of his greenspaces. God knows he's got enough of them. In 2008, Tualatin Parks passed a parks bond for $100 million. In 2006 Metro passed another Greenspace bond for $227 million. In 1995 they passed $135 million dollar bond for the same stuff. Now they want another $110 million plus.

They've got their money for parks, nearly HALF A BILLION DOLLARS, $462 million to be exact. Houck doesn't want parks anyway, he and his Riverkeeper buddies along with The Audubon Soc. and 1000 Friends of Oregon only want wildlife habitat.