BLOG: "I would like to believe we have nothing to hide..."
Sam Adams
My thanks to Mayor Tom Potter for bringing to light the startling revelation that the local office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation sought to establish a city staff informant inside Portland City Hall.
I would like to believe we have nothing to hide and the FBI is welcome to anoint all the City Hall informers it deems necessary. However, I hope that their efforts to keep track of the Portland City Council will not detract from their other responsibilities to keep Portland safe from terrorism, the drug trade and crime. And, I hope that their effort to get a source inside City Hall is not politically motivated. Given the lack of meaningful oversight of federal law enforcement agencies, it is doubtful we will ever know.
Read Mayor Tom Potter's letter
Posted by Sam Adams on May 24, 2006
(26) Comments | Permalink | TrackBack (2)
Filed Under Blog, Front Page, Public Safety
Comments by site visitors
If anybody has any freezer cash wrapped up in aluminum foil, this might be a good time to relocate it.
Heh, heh.
It seems unlikely the FBI would go on a fishing expedition at City Hall without having a specific area of interest. It may not yet rise to probable cause, or an official investigation, but why ask people if they smell smoke unless they were concerned about a fire.
There's a whole lot of money flying around the PDC, South Waterfront, and the latest planning craze. You gotta dance with them that brung ya.
Posted by: Gecko | May 24, 2006 6:06:45 PM
When little brother wants to dictate the types of housing we as citizens live in, dictate the mode of transportation to move about with, choose what products are in our best interest to use, and through social engineering, attempt to control our daily lives in a democratic society, I see no issue with big brother asking some questions. If there is/was no corruption, no propping up of and subsidizing the special interests including developers, and no crafting of socialistic intent going on at City Hall, just having a Federal agent asking questions of an employee should not trigger any kind of an alarm. Nothing to hide means no bells and whistles should go off. However, the Mayor’s response is/was a total over blown reaction compared to the impacts City Hall imposes on freedom of choice. City Hall should be operated like a glass house, but lacks the transparency needed to be viewed by and involve most average citizens.
Posted by: Terry Parker | May 26, 2006 9:02:42 AM
Terry - Your criticism about City Hall not involving citizen is unfounded. How do I know? I'm a citizen who has been involved for the past three years in advising the City Council on utility matters. Guess what - they listen, and sometimes act on our advice. They don't always agree us, but that's to be expected. If you don't like the way things are going, and want change, then get involved. There are abundant opportunities to do that at Portland City Hall
Posted by: Frank Ray | May 26, 2006 9:36:49 AM
"and through social engineering, attempt to control our daily lives in a democratic society"
Please explain how 'social engineering' in Portland has changed your life?
Posted by: MarkDaMan | May 26, 2006 11:57:47 AM
"...and no crafting of socialistic intent going on at City Hall..."
Terry, I think you're confusing an aspect of government's purpose - i.e. instituting policies - with corruption. Please, since when is "socialistic intent" a crime? You have deluded yourself into believing that since the views and policies furthered by CoP's elected officials don't mesh with your opinions, than their "social engineering" schemes must be corrupt.
You would be much more effective on this blog if you stick to what you seem to have pretty well dialed in - that is, the possibility of corruption (which I freely admit may or may not exist) in the dealings with big development. Leave the "social engineering is criminal" shtick at home.
Posted by: Stephen | May 26, 2006 2:47:07 PM
MarkDaMan Please explain how 'social engineering' in Portland has changed your life?
JK:
1. Shoving high density down our throats = congested streets, less affordable housing, higher costs.
2. Tax abatements for allegedly desirable things = higher taxes for everyone else.
3. Urban Renewal misuse in the Pearl and SoWhat keep about $67 million of tax dollars in their own districts for infrastructure while the rest of us have to pay for their basic services. Contrary to PDC claims, the money will NEVER be made up, unless the residents pay tax at a higher rate than the rest of the city to make up for 15 years (min) of their tax buying their own fancy new streets parks etc., while the rest of us pay more or get less. Look at it as a LID that is paid for with a property tax credit.
4. Raising the price of parking to finance the streetcar.
5. Wasting transportation money on rail when the money would be far more effective if spent on roads. (Light rail removes less that ½ lane of traffic from US26 and I80 while costing as much as several lanes of freeway). Result: we all waste time and money in congestion. Make no mistake TIME IS MONEY.
6. Reducing road capacity to accommodate politically correct uses, at the expense of most users: wide sidewalks remove parking or travel lanes; bubble curbs make driving more dangerous and may get peds killed by having them stand closer to fast moving heavy equipment - a big red flag in an industry environment (PDOT has no data); speed bumps slow emergency vehicles which does cost lives - PDOT has no data on the net effect; same for little traffic circles - slowed emergency service and no data at PDOT. (Actually PDOT has twice coughed data that was irrelevant while claiming that it was meaningful.)
7. Putting bus stops such that buses have to block traffic. Note that buses carry only 5.1% of commuters. Buses stopping in traffic blocks the 85% of commuters who commute in cars for the 5% that ride buses. (U.S. census travel to work data.)
8. Higher taxes or lower services for all of us to make up for tax abatements given to transit oriented developments. These multi story units drive up the cost of housing because they cost around $35,000 more PER LIVING UNIT than plain old houses. They increase congestion by putting more people in the same area. (Congestion will stay the same only if ALL new people do not drive.)
9. Campaign to reduce driving, if it works at all, causes people to avoid doing what they desire. To the extent that they move to transit, they become welfare cases since the rest of the people pay over 80% of their transportation costs. The real cost of Trimet is so high, that it is cheaper to make payments on a new car than to pay the real cost of a monthly pass. Transit is also slower, and less convenient both of which represent a lower standard of living (people are willing to pay real money for speed and convenience). And in the days of increased concern about the bird flu: you are more likely to catch something on the bus than in your car. BTW can you have your morning coffee on the bus, sitting down, free of panhandlers and drug deals?
Then there is the cost of planning researched by O’Toole. See http://americandreamcoalition.org/penalty.html
Mark: Refresh my memory: which government agency or contractor do you or a family member work for?
Thanks
JK (who receives no income form city planning, city policy, city projects or smart growth, social engineering, or driving people out of their cars)
Posted by: jim karlock | May 27, 2006 8:25:50 AM
Hmmm - Jim seems to have answered the question that Mark put to him quite nicely, good job. However, I am willing to admit that while city hall IS shoving this down the throats of many, it is still not a crime. In fact, I believe that much of what I might consider underhanded, corrupt and unethical is NOT illegal. In some cases they merely change a law or make one up (like public financing of campaigns). Add to it the huge amount of clones who merely nod their heads and follow like sheep and you have Portland.
That said, I wonder why Gramps got his dander up over someone trying to either see if something illegal IS going on at city hall - or, just trying to impress and hit on a gal. If what you do is for the public and is squeaky clean (as it should be if you are working for the public) then you should throw open the records for ANYONE, Joe Citizen or the FBI to come look at. You should welcome them looking at it anytime, anywhere. Much of what I do (for a job) is public record and I have no worries and no regrets about how I conduct myself - can city hall say the same? The reaction of city hall says someone down there is worried.
Posted by: mmmarvel | May 27, 2006 8:49:00 AM
Thanks Jim and kudos for answering the social engineering question directed at me, especially for #7 relating to bus stops where busses stop in travel lanes (and at curb extensions). I will only add three things.
1. Urban renewal districts combined siphon off approximately 60 million dollars in property tax revenues each year that would otherwise go to basic city wide services and schools. Based on my own property taxes, about 22 percent of the total amount would go to the Portland Public Schools. Using that same percentage, the City is taking for urban renewal approximately 13 million dollars yearly that would otherwise support the school district. That affects everybody!!!
2. The property taxes on my home include over $200.00 noted as “Urban Renewal-Portland”. I do not live in an urban renewal district and I was not given the opportunity to vote on this additional tax that goes to pay off urban renewal bonds. Basically this tax is a subsidy for Homer and his developer buddies, and to subsidize the property tax abatements the City hands out like candy for high density and transit friendly developments. Transit friendly development qualifications include include any new apartment or condo complex that is located within a few blocks of a bus, light rail or trolley line.
3. Families (mostly middle class families) are fleeing the city for the suburbs in droves. Portland Public Schools have declining enrollment while the suburban districts are growing. The reasons include the high cost of living in the in the City vs the suburbs, most new housing construction in the City is not family friendly and most families use their cars for primary mobility, not transit or bicycles where Portland is spending transportation resources. The end result is the social engineering policies of the City of Portland are driving families to move out of the city and into the suburbs.
Posted by: Terry Parker | May 28, 2006 2:42:42 PM
I apologize for the double post; however there appears to be some question as to whether all the business being done by the City is truly squeaky clean. It is probably a matter of opinion, but there are plenty of city organized “deals” to be suspicious about. First is the budget for the OHSU Tram. Once the overpriced cat was out of the bag, the City bought it anyway. Second is the City Council’s new best friend and sidekick who way to often seems to pop up on the receiving end when development funds handed out, tax abatements are bestowed and/or when PDC funded gravy train projects and contracts are awarded. How much did the City pay for that South Waterfront land that Homer bought for half the price, land that Homer will ultimately get the cushy exclusive contract to develop? Third, when the Mayor could not get public support for his tax proposals for schools, he made a back room deal with the state legislature to extend a property tax levy without the vote of the people. Only one school district in Oregon (PPS) has been given this authority and the special privilege to have immunity from voters.
All of these examples of dealings may be technically legal, but they sure are not at all transparent to the public as they should be.
Posted by: Terry Parker | May 28, 2006 5:15:38 PM
Good grief Sam,
There is plenty being hidden.
Where are the State Law required Urban Renewal yearly impact to basic services reports? The ones you promised to look into???
Where's the life cycle cost estimate of the Tram? The professional estimate which should have been completed before the Tram was approved???
How about a "real" updated budget spread sheet for SoWa?
It is unfathomable that one has not been provided.
I know you have not seen one.
It appears the council and PDC commissioners can't recognize what they are being shown is NO budget at all.
The SoWa Citizen Advisory Committee has raised this concern only to be completely ignored.
What's being presented as budgets are chuck full of holes, with no accumulative spending accounting, no longer any forecasts of out year costs or effects of early phase cost overruns will have on later phases.
The SoWa plan is proceeding exactly as the $15.5 million Tram did as if nothing has been learned.
What we do know is that many projects other than the Tram are far over budget and behind schedule.
The magnitude of the problem is being deliberately obscured by the PDC as evidenced by their reports to the URAC, PDC Commissioners and Council.
So deceptive are these reports that the PDC actually claims the URAC has "worked with the numbers and budgets for months" giving councilors the impression there has been some scrutiny.
There has been none, zero, squat.
Not even debt service costs have been updated let alone transportation improvement costs, park costs, greenway costs and affordable housing costs.
Instead, the fast and loose use of disconnected, incremental numbers are making the development agreement amendments and TIF more sloppy and unreliable every day.
What does it take to get the most fundamental management practices implemented?
The FBI?
Posted by: Steve Schopp | May 29, 2006 8:28:54 AM
Steve Schopp:
YOU: Where are the State Law required Urban Renewal yearly impact to basic services reports? The ones you promised to look into???
ME: I did. I asked the City Attorney and she did not find the requirement you mentioned (see my other post). If she is wrong, tell me.
YOU: Where's the life cycle cost estimate of the Tram? The professional estimate which should have been completed before the Tram was approved???
ME: I agree. That's why I released PDOT's Life Cycle Cost Estimate last week, before City Council approves the operating agreement. I'll have staff post it tomorrow for comment.
YOU: How about a "real" updated budget spread sheet for SoWa? It is unfathomable that one has not been provided. I know you have not seen one.
ME: You are right. I have asked for one, too. PDC says it is working on it.
Sam
Posted by: Sam Adams | May 29, 2006 7:26:07 PM
Thank you Sam for the feedback.
Sam, "I did. I asked the City Attorney and she did not find the requirement you mentioned (see my other post). If she is wrong, tell me."
Here's what state law says. It's ORS 457.460:
(1) An agency shall, by August 1 of each year, prepare a statement on the same basis on which its financial statements are prepared containing:
* * * * *
(e) An analysis of the impact, if any, of carrying out the urban renewal plan on the tax collections for the preceding year for all taxing districts included under ORS 457.430.
(2) The statement required by subsection (1) of this section shall be filed with the governing body of the municipality. Notice shall be published that the statement has been prepared and is on file with the municipality and the agency and the information contained in the statement is available to all interested persons. The notice shall be published once a week for not less than two successive weeks before September 1 of the year for which the statement is required in accordance with ORS 457.115. The notice shall summarize the information required under subsection (1)(a) to (d) of this section and shall set forth in full the information required under subsection (1)(e) of this section.
Here is an example of a city complying with State law. http://www.ci.oswego.or.us/finance/fy04_impact_report.pdf
Posted by: Steve Schopp | May 29, 2006 9:18:56 PM
I and others have not raised the impact reports issue for no reason.
It's the blatant disregard for State law PDC has demonstrated.
The PDC and city lawyers know exactly what they have been doing in NOT complying with State law.
As thoroughly detailed here http://bojack.org/mt-arc/002543.html
And linked to this PDC site.
http://www.pdc.us/pdf/pubs_general/ura-rpt_02-03_03-04.pdf
Looking through the reports that the PDC has filed in the recent past, the reader questions whether they comply with this legal requirement.
For example, here is the PDC report for the two fiscal years 2002-2004. When you get to the part where the PDC's supposed to show the impact of its urban renewal program on local tax collections, the PDC drops back 10 yards and punts. Look at the very last page, where the impact is supposed to be shown. It isn't. Instead, the PDC tries to get away with this:
[I]n FY 2000-01, local government levies were not affected by urban renewal, except as an increase in rates might contribute to Measure 5 compression. With the City of Portland, compression occurred on a “spot” basis because of the property-by-property computation of compression. It is not possible to determine the effect that urban renewal taxes had on each local jurisdiction with respect to spot compression.
That's it? No numbers, no facts and figures, just "it had some effect, but we can't tell you what it is"? Mr. Warner, I'm no municipal law expert, but that can't be what the Legislature intended when it passed that law.
Posted by: Steve Schopp | May 30, 2006 7:47:08 AM
Jim, Terry, Marvel, Steve,
from Marriam-Webster
Main Entry: social engineering
Function: noun
: management of human beings in accordance with their place and function in society : applied social science
that is quite a strong statement you all are throwing around, according to the official definition. Do you really think our city is managing human beings in accordance to their place and function in society? It sounds like you are accusing the city council of some sort of Hitler-esque management system.
Portland offers choices in living, commuting, and shopping; while you are still free to drive anywhere you like, albeit not in the time frame you might prefer. That isn't social engineering people.
If the people of Portland really believed in the doom and gloom y'all speak on this blog, both city councilors wouldn't have cruised to re-election without even having to face runoff elections in November. You peeps are really out of touch with Portland.
Thanks,
Mark (who receives no income form city planning, city policy, city projects or smart growth, social engineering, or driving people out of their cars nor forcing them to stay in them either)
Posted by: MarkDaMan | May 30, 2006 9:39:19 AM
"It sounds like you are accusing the city council of some sort of Hitler-esque management system."
Now that was funny.
Of course the question is exaclty what Sam himself suggests.
What system is it that prepares a full life cycle cost estimate after the project is approved and half built,
a systme that violates state law in refusing to provide reports, and a system that neglects to maintains genuine budget/spread sheets for major developments?
Your uniformed preaching aside there are serious ramifications for the city
despite the facade you contribute to, what the public has been led to beleive or how they vote.
Apparently you find it all just swell.
Posted by: Steve Schopp | May 30, 2006 10:10:59 AM
^Actually as a Portlander, Steve, I find it offensive that you would come onto a website created by Mr. Adams so that he can better speak with those he represents, and call my comments 'uniformed preaching' or that the voters of Portland have been 'led to beleive' anything.
"""Apparently you find it all just swell."""
Oh no Steve, I demand a lot from my government. The government I elect and pay for. As a city resident, I e-mail my representative all the time, and get responses back. I visit first Thursdays at City Hall and talk candidly with those that represent Portlanders. I even have called on occasion, to demand answers. You see, I am an active part of my government and in being an active Portlander, not every answer I get will be posted on your method of communication and information, a city councilor's blog in a city you don't reside.
Posted by: MarkDaMan | May 30, 2006 1:48:24 PM
Nice rambling and diverting but what do you think of a system that prepares a full life cycle cost estimate only after the project is approved and half built,
a system that violates state law in refusing to provide reports,
and a system that neglects to maintain genuine budget/spread sheets for major developments?
Either you don't believe this is what is happening,
or it doesn't matter to you,
or you don't know enough,
or you see pretty things and that's good enough,
or since you heard it from me you are ignoring it.
Which is it?
The public as well as elected officials are being misled on many things just as they were with the $15.5 million Tram, the Alexan Tax abatement proposal, previous TIF and with various other public agency's works.
You are indeed misinformed and uninformed as you defend what you do not understand.
Whether or not you are offended is completely irrelevant.
Sam, it appears, may be now getting to the bottom of some key issues and policies in question by many
"PORTLANDERS" who appreciate his work.
If that gripes you so be it.
Posted by: Steve Schopp | May 30, 2006 3:30:40 PM
"...or you see pretty things and that's good enough..."
You nailed Mark right there, Steve. I've seen him posting on Architectural blogs.
I'll just bet he does have a vested interest in architecture, urban renewal and design.
Posted by: Chris McMullen | May 31, 2006 10:46:38 AM
Mark,
You quoted Marriam-Webster as follows:
“Main Entry: social engineering
Function: noun
: management of human beings in accordance with their place and function in society: applied social science” and then asked the question; “Do you really think our city is managing human beings in accordance to their place and function in society?”
The short answer is YES!
Much of the social engineering taking place is done through tax codes. Some is continual rhetoric and propaganda coming from elected officials. For example: Subsidies and tax abatements are handed out like candy to high density and transit related developments with back room deals as the norm. Bicyclists pay no direct tax for bicycle infrastructure and the government services they receive. Motorists subsidize bicyclists and mass transit including the trolley. The proliferation of curb extensions is taking place all over the city. Curb extensions create unnecessary congestion because they require busses to stop in travel lanes when stopping for passengers instead of pulling over to the curb to let other vehicles pass. This is just another costly socially engineered trick as an attempt to force people from their cars. The rain water runoff tax being forced on homeowners to disconnect their downspouts from the sewer system, downspouts that are connected because it was part of the City Code when the structure was built. Urban renewal designed to replace blight is social engineering. Not all urban renewal areas are truly blighted but I still have a charge on my property tax bill to help pay off the bonds even though I do not live in an urban renewal district. Reducing Interstate Avenue from four to two motor vehicle lanes when light rail was built is social engineering. Opposing Wal-Mart is social engineering. I could go on and on, but just about every decision the City Council makes today has the implications of social engineering. Furthermore, all the aforementioned examples relate to the “management of human beings in accordance with their place and function in society .“ That is social engineering!!!
Posted by: Terry Parker | May 31, 2006 12:08:54 PM
..."...or you see pretty things and that's good enough..."
You nailed Mark right there, Steve. I've seen him posting on Architectural blogs....
I'll just bet he does have a vested interest in architecture, urban renewal and development
Well Chris you've gone and educated the world again. You should get some sort of medal, or Pulitzer for your investigative techniques! I post on architectural blogs, who the hell cares? Really? I appreciate architecture (means I must work for Homer) I appreciate innovative design (now I'm a PDC guy) I enjoy the study of people (hmmm, maybe that qualifies me for Metro) I like to garden (Al's called me last week) I like to hike, camp, swim, eat, travel and so on...Don't be a nut, it makes you look ignorant.
Posted by: MarkDaMan | May 31, 2006 1:25:47 PM
Chris McMullin on me:
"I'll just bet he does have a vested interest in architecture, urban renewal and design."
Chris McMullin when being questioned on the WalMart thread:
"You sure make a lot of assumptions"
These people are all alike!
Posted by: MarkDaMan | Jun 1, 2006 8:56:13 AM
I'm the guy that went to the City Budget Hearing on May 11th and said (on the record) something to the effect of 'people tell me what they watched on TV last night... I tell them I told the city council that the Bush Administration should be impeached for Treason.' Had I realized this FBI thing happened earlier the same day, I wouldn't have said that at all (I could tell by the look on a few people's faces that I was hitting too close to home - after this was announced, I know why). However, this incident just highlights the reasons for what I said.
Sam, you're the best Commissioner I never voted for, Tom is the best mayor I never voted for; and I wholeheartedly applaud the City's efforts on this matter.
(I would have posted something like this on Tom Potter's page, but decided not to, due to the overwhelming amounts of spam and posts trying to change the subject - even more so than here.)
Posted by: Jason B. | Jun 3, 2006 1:27:03 PM
what's striking is the sheer ineptitude of the agent. why did he think approaching someone he didn't know and asking her to spy on her co-workers would work?
Posted by: jami | Jun 7, 2006 3:57:09 PM
Why are you hiding the true Life Cycle Costs on the Tram's complete operating budget?
Why is there still no update on the FHWA Airspace Lease?
Posted by: Gecko | Jun 8, 2006 3:05:00 AM
Post your comment
Please note: your email address, although required to post, will not be visible. We remove inappropriate or offensive content, and content deemed improper by State and City election and ethics law. The comments posted do not necessarily reflect the views of the office or the City of Portland.
[deleted due to inappropriate content]
Posted by: Steve | May 24, 2006 11:35:26 AM