CommissionerSam.com - Our Initiatives

A Commitment to Sustainability

The Office — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 17:27:18 -0700

Sam and Commissioner Saltzman display the freshly signed "Commitment Statement"On Tuesday, June 10th, the Commissioners Dan Saltzman and Sam Adams welcomed community leaders to sign a commitment statement to create a Sustainability Center of Excellence to establish Portland and Oregon as the global leader in sustainability. This commitment statement has been embraced by leaders from the business, academic and nonprofit sectors, and sets in motion a process for working together to develop a large, multi-faceted center.

While individual momentum has propelled Portland forward, the Center will centralize diverse and innovative skills in a way that promotes cross-fertilization, collaborative decision-making and greater visibility in the national and international arena.

"To achieve the vision of being the world's best we all need to come together in one initiative. I believe our collaboration improves the scope, reach and probability of success for each of us," Sam offered the group in his opening remarks.

The City is working to find an interim space for the center, which could open as early as this fall. At the same time, a working group is being convened to determine the long-term location and programmatic development for the center. Recommendations will be made to the broader group in September.

More than 100 businesses, academic institutions and nonprofit organizations have expressed their support for this visionary approach, and many more are expected to join in their support as the center begins to take shape. These include Oregon Museum of Science and Industry, Gerding Edlen Development, Oregon BEST, Portland State University, Multnomah County, Green Building Services, Lewis and Clark Law School, and the Association of Portland Neighborhood Business Associations.

To sign up your organization, please contact sustainable.portland@gmail.com

Grey to Green: A Comprehensive Approach to Clean Rivers and Watershed Health

Sam Adams — Sun, 27 Apr 2008 11:51:14 -0700

Portland is blessed with abundant rainfall. With it, our city grows lush and beautiful. But all of this rain comes with a challenge: our annual average of 37 inches creates a staggering 20 billion gallons of stormwater runoff every year.

Without proper management, stormwater runoff can damage our watersheds, rivers, and streams. The good news is that Portland is well past the days of simply funneling stormwater into pipes that release fast-moving, dirty water directly into once-pristine rivers and streams.

In 2005, City Council embraced a holistic approach to watershed health in adopting the Portland Watershed Management Plan. With this new strategy and thanks to on-going help and a steady application of pressure from organizations like the Audubon Society of Portland and the Urban Greenspaces Institute, we are ready to step up our investments in clean rivers and streams to preserve our urban watersheds for generations to come. We're calling this shift in the way we do business "Grey to Green".

Portland is at the forefront of using "green infrastructure" - sustainable stormwater management technologies that mimic natural systems. The city is dotted with parking lot swales, green streets and rain gardens that filter stormwater pollutants and allow water to soak into the ground, replenishing groundwater supplies.

But repairing our urban landscape is not enough. We also need to restore and preserve existing natural areas throughout our city, by fighting invasive weeds, restoring native plants, protecting our most critical natural land, and replacing culverts that harm fish.

These are not new approaches, but shifting our focus and resources from grey to green is a vital step toward improving the health of our watersheds and rivers. With this shift comes the added benefit that we don't get from miles of piped sewers - cleaner air and water, reduced urban temperatures, and increased and improved habitat. And, these approaches often cost less than traditional piped systems.

What excites me most is that this new approach allows every residence and business to be a part of the solution, whether it's installing an ecoroof or simply planting a tree.

Grey to Green is an investment that makes sense. And we are ready to act now.

Attachment	Size
G2G_Council_PowerPoint.pdf	3.4 MB
G2G Benefits.xls	63.5 KB
Oregonian Opinion Page.pdf	17.01 KB
Grey to Green FINAL.pdf	2.7 MB

City of Portland Receives Credit for Innovations in Government

The Office — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 15:27:50 -0700

Harvard Picks Lobbying Registration Code and Home Again - part of the 10 Year Plan To End Homelessness - as Two of the 50 Most Innovative Government Programs

The Ash Institute for Democratic Governance and Innovation at Harvard Kennedy School today announced that the City of Portland's Lobbying Registration Code and the Multnomah County and Portland's Home Again made the Top 50 Programs of the 2008 Innovations in American Government Awards competition. Selected from a pool of nearly 1,000 applicants, these 50 programs represent the best in government innovation from local, county, city, tribal, state, and federal levels. Each of the Top 50 programs underwent several rounds of rigorous evaluation from a committee of practitioners and policy experts from Harvard Kennedy School as well as renowned institutions nationwide. Representing a range of jurisdictions from across the country, the Top 50 programs include seventeen cities/towns, four counties, six federal agencies, three school districts, nineteen states and one tribal government.

The City of Portland's Lobbying Registration Code requires entities that lobby city officials (over 8 hours a quarter) to register with the city and to report what city officials they talked with, the subject discussed, the amount of money expended and when the lobbying occurred. That information is then made available to the public via the auditor's website. This is the only system in the country that focuses on actual lobbying hours as well as gifts and contributions.

After a year of shaping the lobbying regulations draft through public input, the regulations were passed by City Council at the end of 2005, and registration started in early 2006. Commissioner Adams is honored to have the regulations recognized by the Kennedy School. As a result of the regulations, over 217 lobbyists, representing 57 lobbying entities, have registered their activities with the City Auditor. As well, City officials publish their calendars. Commissioner Adams said, "It is an honor for Portland to be nationally recognized in our efforts in increasing transparency and accountability in local government."

Since the 10-year Plan to End Homelessness was announced in December 2004, the City and County have housed more than 1,200 homeless individuals and more than 1,600 homeless families. Over 1,000 units of permanent supportive housing (where services such as mental health treatment, addiction treatment and job training are provided onsite) have been built. Home Again is the City and County's effort to end peoples' homelessness.

These two programs highlight Portland's innovative approach to government.

Finalists among the Top 50 will be announced on June 3, 2008. On June 12, finalist programs will make presentations on their initiatives before a National Selection Committee, chaired by David Gergen. Winners will receive $100,000 to replicate their efforts in other communities. Additional information about the Ash Institute is available at http://www.ashinstitute.harvard.edu.

Safe, Sound & Green Intiative Going to the Voters

Sam Adams — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 15:28:11 -0800

Today, at my request, city council referred the "Safe, Sound & Green Streets" program back to my office with an expectation that we will refer the program to voters in November 2008.

You have heard from me many times that Safe, Sound & Green Streets will be an important step forward for Portland when implemented. For the first time in nearly two decades, Portlanders will have stable funding to meet basic safety and maintenance needs on major streets.

A program of this consequence should be enacted by a unanimous city council. Until last week, my council colleagues were united in supporting safer streets as a matter of leadership. At council proceedings, transportation staff, community leaders, and all who have participated to date appreciated council's acknowledgment of the painstaking analytical and public outreach effort.

That effort has earned support from an 89-person stakeholder committee covering a range of transportation interests, the editorial boards of The Oregonian, The Portland Tribune and The Portland Business Journal, and untold numbers of Portlanders who responded to our citywide notices and attended one of the 21 town hall meetings we hosted in every corner of the city.

In addition, we worked in good faith to reach a compromise to address the concerns of convenience stores and the petroleum representatives.

Regrettably, the influence of oil industry representatives has taken its toll. I no longer have unanimous council support to enact the program.

I now propose that city council refer the Safe, Sound & Green initiative to the November general election ballot.

Portlanders can trust that oil industry representatives will embark upon a monumental misinformation campaign. Watch the money: they will spend much more on television ads and other venues to kill Safe, Sound & Green than they would have spent to simply pay their fair share to return Portland's major streets to working order.

As the champion of Safe, Sound & Green, it's true that I worry about holding onto the factual high ground during this tsunami of misinformation.

This is Portland, however. Portlanders have a proud history of supporting well-articulated, reasonable investments in their community. It's part of what makes us the best city in the country. Safe, Sound & Green will save money, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and--most importantly--save lives.

The general election in November 2008 is virtually guaranteed to ensure the highest voter turnout in the city's history. As a result, the best possible conversation that engages the maximum number of Portlanders about Safe, Sound & Green will occur over the next nine months. In spite of all the oil industry dollars to be spent, I am confident Portland will prevail.

I want to thank my colleagues for their continued support in addressing the transportation concerns facing our city. And I want to thank all of you.

Links to learn more:

Safe, Sound & Green (Project maps, finances, history)
Safe, Sound & Green Streets Stakeholder List
Street fee will pay off in safety, The Portland Tribune
Moving beyond a gas tax, The Oregonian
We can pay now or pay later, The Portland Business Journal
Recent news articles about Safe, Sound & Green

Portland Business Journal: We can pay now or pay later

The Office — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:44:49 -0800

Oregon’s elected officials have a pointed message for their constituents: Pony up. It’s the only way to unclog roads and repair streets.

Congressman Earl Blumenauer, Gov. Ted Kulongoski and Portland City Commissioner Sam Adams are all calling for significant investments in transportation. Not tomorrow, but now.

Like it or not, they’re right...[read more. subscription required]

Two Small Proposed Changes & One Procedural Question for Transportation Funding

Sam Adams — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 18:58:08 -0800

In response to the testimony we heard on Wednesday, January 9 regarding the "Safe, Sound and Green" transportation funding proposal, I propose two substantive changes and a procedural option for council and the community to consider.

Add a "Claw Back" Provision

Paul Romain, lobbyist for the Oregon Petroleum Association and Richard Kosesan, lobbyist for the Oregon Neighborhood Store Association, voiced opposition to the proposal. They said that the City of Portland's $422 million transportation safety and maintenance backlog will be solved with a statewide gas tax increase.

I wish history supported that view. Unfortunately, we've heard this for 15 years. It hasn't happened.

You will recall that the city historically has relied on the state gas tax to fund street maintenance and safety. The legislature last addressed the state gas tax 15 years ago, in 1993. Because of the state's failure to act, the city's maintenance and safety backlog is $422 million, and growing by $9 million each year.

Even if the legislature does act in 2009 for the first time in 16 years, the state's funding formula is such that it would take a 27.5 cent per gallon gas tax increase to address our backlog.

Nobody believes a 27.5 cent gas tax is likely.

Since it's unlikely, it raises a related question: will the state change its funding formula to see that Portland receives a larger share than it currently receives? The forumula is complicated and the short answer is no.

History cautions against both concepts, and I urge council to stay the course. It's the safest choice for the city.

That said, we can accommodate the lobbyists on the remote chance they are correct. To do that, I am proposing a "claw back" provision to the proposal. If the State provides the City of Portland transportation resources sufficient to meet the maintenance and safety needs outlined in the ordinance's exhibits, we will reduce the Street Maintenance and Safety rates proportionately. We will "claw back" our fee.

Eliminate automatic Consumer Price Index fee increases

Our first reading included a provision to automatically add 3.5% each year to the Street Safety and Maintenance Fee to cover inflation. The intention was to avoid the problem of inflation eating away our ability to manage streets and bridges, as illustrated by the state's gas tax.

Notwithstanding our experience with the state, some have stated the increase should not be automatic. I believe that's a fair argument.

Instead, the 3.5% now will be the maximum increase amount and the Portland Office of Transportation will need to secure annual approval from the Independent Oversight Committee and the Portland City Council to adjust for inflation. Inflation adjustments also must include a consideration of the status of the local economic conditions.

An Option to Reduce the Possibility of a "Single Subject" Conflict

Law requires that legislation contain only one subject. The Safe, Sound and Green Street proposal is about one overall topic: raising funds for street maintenance and safety. However, it contains three different fee rates imposed in one ordinance. The three rates are for residential, commercial, and high volume pass-by commercial interests.

The City Attorney has advised that while including all three rates in one ordinance is likely to withstand a legal challenge based on the single-subject requirement, it would be safer if each fee rate was established in its own ordinance.

Why worry about this? The opponents have made clear they will use all available options to prevent the Safe, Sound and Green proposal from being implemented.

Supporters are of mixed minds on how to respond to this issue. Some feel strongly that we must eliminate any vulnerability to legal challenge. The concern is that all of the community's efforts should not be lost to a legal technicality.

On a related side note, splitting the ordinance into three will not affect the chances of this issue being referred to the voters for repeal. With paid gatherers, we have been told by those involved with gathering the signatures to refer this issue last time it was considered by the Portland City Council in 2001 that it is no more difficult for opponents to collect referral signatures for three ordinances versus one ordinance.

Other supporters are concerned that the possibility of three separate ordinances on the ballot will allow opponents to "cherry pick" for defeat the ordinance that affects them, leaving some payer groups paying and others exempt - not an equitable result.

This is a complicated procedural question. I welcome your thoughts and having a discussion about the issue at City Council.

On the regular City Council Agenda for Wednesday, January 16, I have filed a set of three new ordinances (Agenda items 98, 99, 100) that split the original ordinance and include the substantive changes regarding the "claw back" and CPI issues summarized above.

I have also left on the Wednesday, January 16 agenda the ordinance (Agenda item 101) heard and amended on January 9. We can proceed by amending the original ordinance to include the substantive changes regarding the "clawback" and CPI issues.

Having all these ordinances on the same City Council agenda will allow the Portland City Council and the community to discuss and decide procedural options.

Second Reading/Vote Moved to January 23

Because of the proposed substantive changes and the need to discuss the procedural options, next week's council hearing on this issue will be a second "first reading," with the second reading and vote January 23, 2008.

Relevant Docuememts

More transparency in government by reducing the threshold for lobbying registration

Shoshanah Oppenheim — Sat, 08 Dec 2007 14:11:00 -0800

On Wednesday August 8, Portland City Council unanimously voted to reduce the hourly threshold that triggers a lobbying entity's obligation to register with the auditors offices. The City Council believes that the threshold reduction will require more entities to disclose their lobbying activities. This action builds on Commissioner Adams' efforts to "daylight" political decision making and create a more accessible city government.

Under the changes, lobbying entities who spend more than eight hours "attempting to influence the official action of City officials" must register with the auditor. Under the original ordinance sponsored by Sam, elected officials and bureau directors must publish their official calendars. This is an effort to disclose who is meeting with city leaders and whose interests are being represented in the decisions of the council.

Sam is pleased with the threshold reduction and said that "Portland is a very engaged City. Residents deserve to know how their money is being spent, how decisions are made, and why."

Please give us your feedback on this issue and how we can make the city more accountable to you.

Related Documents

Copy of Ordinance

Media Mentions

Blogs

Council Unanimously Votes to Reduce Threshold for Lobbying Activities

Policy Associate Internship - Creative Capacity

Jesse Beason — Tue, 30 Oct 2007 15:27:58 -0700

We're looking for a policy associate to help us work on our Creative Capacity Strategy. The purpose of the strategy is to build and support a sustainable creative community through prioritized strategies with clear costs and achievable ways to fund them.

Over the next six months, we will be performing research on public opinion, best practices and methodologies for supporting the creative community in our region. This includes regular committee meetings, interviews and polling.

Description

This is an unpaid internship.

Primarily, you will be working with Sam's arts & culture policy team including staff, consultants and partners in two main capacities:

Logistics for public meetings, presentations and communications (minutes, web updates, synthesizing input)
Researching public funding methodologies and strategies

You may be asked to take on smaller office tasks as needed.

Requirements

Interest in arts policy
Ability to focus on one major project, while simultaneously handling other smaller tasks
Good communication skills
Excellent writing ability
Superior research skills
Ability to commit to and adhere to a regular set schedule of 15-20 hours and hopefully available Tuesday mornings before 10:30
Availability for a few evening meetings and events
Ability to work well within a diverse office
General computer literacy and office skills
Ability to learn quickly in a fast-paced environment
Ability to take direction, meet deadlines and work independently with minimal supervision
Flexibility and adaptability to change

Optional skills

Background in arts policy or political science
Design skills
Facilitation skills

Term

Three months, with the option for an additional three months, to begin upon hire

Please submit no later than 5 p.m. on Friday, November 9th:

Cover Letter that includes your availability
Resume
Writing sample of no more than three pages

Email preferred.

Jesse Beason | Senior Policy Director
Office of City Commissioner Sam Adams
1221 SW Fourth Avenue | Room 220
Portland, Oregon 97204-1998
p: 503-823-4128 | f: 503-823-3017
e: jbeason@ci.portland.or.us

From Here to Portland's Transportation Tomorrow

Sam Adams — Sun, 29 Jul 2007 17:41:19 -0700

From Here to Portland's Transportation Tomorrow
City Club of Portland Remarks
Commissioner Sam Adams
July 20, 2007

Listen to the speech here.

Thank you, Don Williams, for that gracious introduction. It is an honor to return to the Portland City Club.

I have never seen a passion for any other issue be more intense, a problem more intractable, or options so hotly debated. It was on the front page of every newspaper and the top of all the newscasts for weeks. In fact, history likely will regard it as the most important transportation-related question of our generation. If you haven't already guessed, the issue I am talking about is, "Should, or should we not, allow duct tape on our streets and sidewalks?"

I guess it is all about perspective, isn't it?

Context is important: and to my way of thinking, a great transportation system never guarantees a great city, but a lousy transportation system almost always guarantees a lousy one. Why? Because transportation should not be an end unto itself but must serve to promote other important civic goals, such as: an educated citizenry engaged in life-long learning; locally-owned businesses ready to win sales at home and in the world's marketplace while providing family-wage jobs; a sustainable and green and beautiful city in balance with nature; a robust creative and science community; affordable housing and equality of opportunity; a safe city that embraces the world and flourishes as a hub for trade; and, an effective regional partnership between citizens, labor, business, advocacy groups and government.

We all know that Portland gets high praise for its transportation innovations. Just yesterday, CNN reported, that "Probably the best asset [Portland] has to offer travelers...is its extensive and reliable transit system." This feedback is great for our collective ego. But we need to stay humble in the knowledge that our transportation system does not adequately serve tens of thousands of Portlanders. And we must be honest with ourselves that the 30-year-old transportation vision we have been operating under has outlived it usefulness, that we face major new challenges, and that a key decision-points that will shape what kind of transportation city and region we will for the next half-century are fast approaching.

Today I'm going to summarize the key transportation challenges we face and our efforts to address them over the past 24 months. Then I'll transition to potential solutions and wrap up with the community benefits I see if we embrace a transportation transformation.

The challenges:

Our first and most tragic: Portland's streets are killing and injuring people despite the fact that we know how to make them safer. Streets like 82nd Avenue, 122nd Avenue and West Burnside - these are dangerous streets because we have lacked adequate funds to implement safety solutions, to enforce traffic laws and educate road users. And when I say, "safety solutions," I mean the most basic of things like sidewalks -- over 60 miles of Portland busiest streets - the streets that people to walk on to catch the bus - over 60 miles of these kind of streets lack sidewalks. Sixty miles: that is the distance between Portland and Hood River.

With such a safety gap in our transportation system, I don't blame parents for not wanting their kids to walk or bike to school, which contributes to the rising rate of childhood obesity. And I understand why the concerns about safety keep more adults from using their bikes. Congressman Earl Blumenauer rightly calls the bicycle the single most efficient form of urban transportation ever conceived. And yet only 3.5% of city travel trips take advantage of such efficiency because so many perceive our streets to be unsafe.

Our second transportation challenge: our basic road and bridge system is crumbling. Early estimates put the repair bill at $422 million today and $9 million more for each year we wait. Add another $325 million for the County's Willamette River bridges. The City or County does not have this kind of money or a revenue source to get it.

These antiquated streets also contribute substantially to another, sometimes not-so-obvious problem: the $1.4 billion price tag we have to pay to stop untreated pollution from entering the Willamette River. I'm talking about the Big Pipe Project, the largest public works project in the city's history. More than 60% of our stormwater pollution comes from our road system.

Our third major transportation issue is the erosion of our land use laws. Measure 37 claims filed in our area threaten to blow out the region's Urban Growth Boundary, the most important tool we have for keeping a region scaled for people; if the UGB goes, likely so too will the remaining capacity of our road and freeway systems. This is a disaster in the making.

Our fourth challenge is gridlock: Each morning and evening, 7 million motor vehicle trips try to squeeze into Portland's arterial streets and freeways. With so many people stuck waiting in traffic congestion, unabated, it will cost the local economy $1 billion every year by 2025.

And that brings me to my final two transportation issues, numbers five and six on my list, respectively: global warming and peak oil. Kudos to Commissioners Erik Sten for his forward thinking plan to reduce CO2 gas emissions, Dan Saltzman for his leadership on our peak oil response plan and Randy Leonard on his biodiesel local production and sales strategy.

There work is important because the age of cheap energy is over. Consider this: the Environmental Protection Agency reports that America is now spending more on transportation than food. And it is worse for the working poor, who now spend more on transportation than housing and food combined.

Ok, upfront, I have hit you hard with the gloom-and-doom to drive home the fact that the transportation challenges we face are numerous, very tough and more lethal than ever. But our collective transportation challenges are also very solvable with a smart new regional vision that integrates regional transportation and land use planning, wise investments that diversify transportation choice, and some good ‘ol Portland-style gumption.

Our new approach started 24 months ago when I was appointed the city's transportation commissioner. As commissioner-in-charge I am determined to lead Portland's transportation agency in a new direction of increased sustainability, accountability and results. With the appointment of Sue Keil as Portland's new transportation director, most all the senior managers in PDOT are new to their posts. We have completed two outside management reviews and we are implementing changes from a recent audit. The agency's budget is put together with advice for a citizens and labor budget committee. And we don't just wait for transportation problems to come to us downtown; we're out looking for them. We have held 15 transportation public town halls and eight neighborhood and business district walkabouts.

And we are doing everything we can to get the basics right, like paving and repairing potholes. We have increasing our pothole repairs by 30%. If we don't see it first, call our pothole hotline at 503-823-BUMP and get it filled.

We have strengthened our partnerships. For the first time ever, all the transportation providers in Portland meet regularly to focus on operational improvements. With the Oregon Department of Transportation, we passed bills in the state legislature that give us the authority to clear more quickly disabled vehicles on the freeway - 50% of local congestion is due to non-repeating delays such as non-injury crashes. And with TriMet and Metro and Milwaukie and Clackamas County we successfully lobbied the state legislature for $250 million to expand light rail from Milwaukie into downtown, and $20 million for streetcars. And along with investments in South Waterfront and on the eastside, we are in the midst of the largest extension of streetcar trackage since the early 1900s.

And we are making a new industry of streetcar manufacturing. Congressman Peter DeFazio - my former boss -- got us started by securing $4 million in federal funds to help build the first Oregon-made streetcar. The state legislature saw a good job-creation opportunity and invested another $20 million. More than 80 delegations from around the country have visited to see our streetcar. I hope it's only a matter of a few short years before Oregon-made streetcars are running throughout the nation.

After inheriting costly mistakes early in the process, we finished the OHSU Tram on the revised timeline and budget with the private sector picking up 85% of its cost.

The city council approved the initial I-5/I-405 "loop group" study recommendations and we are now looking for resources to do the next phase of needed studies.

We moved forward another important project: the Burnside Couch Couplet Plan. We put it through the wringer with a year of additional outside scrutiny, improved it by adding an express streetcar line, and ultimately got it approved by the City Council with unanimous support.

We held Portland's first transportation safety summit and then successfully lobbied for $11 million in city funding to improve Portland's most dangerous intersections. The crosswalks on NW 23rd, NE Alberta, Belmont and other neighborhood main streets are the result of this initiative. So are 100 new school crossing beacons throughout the city. Soon you will see pedestrian medians on east 82nd, 122nd, Foster and more; my thanks to Mayor Tom Potter who was the first of my city council colleagues to grasp the importance of this safety investment.

We completed the city's first freight master plan, which identifies key corridors for safe, effective freight movement-so vital to our economy-that minimize the impact of trucks in our neighborhoods. And from that plan, we have almost finished a complete rebuild of the Columbia Boulevard/North Killingsworth intersection to eliminate a dangerous turns for trucks.

For bicyclists, we've put Portland on the path to Platinum bike status, a national achievement no major city has yet earned. We're planning the next wave of major bicycle investment: an aggressive expansion of the bicycle boulevard network. These are low-traffic, low-impact streets designed to accommodate the auto needs of residents, but where the bicycle rules the road.

And we just yesterday we dedicated the Hollywood sewer and streetscape improvement project with a neighborhood business leader saying that the city's was great to work with, doing everything it could to minimize the negative impacts of construction and boost all the possible positives.

I may have the fancy title of "Commissioner-in-charge" but these results come from a team effort. Thanks to my colleagues on the City Council, all my staff in city hall, at Portland Office of Transportation, our partners at Oregon Department of Transportation, TriMet, Metro, Portland Streetcar, Inc., Portland Development Commission, Oregon Health Sciences University, Bicycle Advisory Committee, Bicycle Transportation Alliance, Pedestrian Advisory Committee, Willamette Pedestrian Coalition, Portland State University, our Freight Advisory Committee, and everybody else who volunteers countless hours of time to make Portland a safe, better place to get around. If you belong to any of the groups I just mentioned, please stand so we can recognize you.

That was a highlight of good work underway to address our transportation dilemmas; now let's discuss other solutions on the drawing board.

Portland enjoys a reputation for being ahead of the curve thanks to the people of this city who embrace innovation. Some of the additional solutions I will discuss today are in the works, others are decades from fruition but all are intended to call upon the best of what it means to be a Portlander.

I'm going to discuss the solutions to our safety and maintenance deficits as one package.

I recently hosted five transportation town halls to discuss this unglamorous but important issue that has been 25 years in the making. After two years of improving the operations of the city's transportation department and unsuccessfully begging the Oregon state legislature for more money, but just as dozens of Oregon cities already have enacted local transportation funding sources, I feel we have no choice but to look at new local transportation funding options.

It might not be widely understood but there is little mystery in how we got here: As project costs have skyrocketed as the price we pay for raw materials and health insurance goes up and up and up. Meanwhile the amount of money we receive from the state via the gas tax, in real terms, goes down, down, down. This has resulted in seven years of budget cuts from current service levels at Portland transportation department.

On this issue, I always get asked some similar questions, good questions that I will try and answer succinctly:

Did the tram eat money that could have been used for maintenance? No, the $8.5 million we spent was for tax increment resources that legally cannot be used for street maintenance.

Should we have spent some of money used to build streetcar and lightrail for maintenance? The bulk of the funds used to pay for these projects - federal transit funds, lottery bonds, tax increment - legally cannot be used for street maintenance.

Aren't Oregon's transportation taxes already high? Oregon's transportation-related fees and taxes, per gallon of gas - the best apples-to-apples comparison - are the lowest in the U.S. west.

If transportation is so important, why not cut other less important city programs and use the savings to pay for transportation? Given the $422 price tag, it is question of trade offs. Do you cut police, fire or parks - all with their own unmet funding needs to pay for transportation?

Why not cut the waste out of PDOT and use the savings for maintenance? We are always looking to improve operations at PDOT but again it has been cutting at its budget for seven years.

With gas prices so high, you in government must be making a mint off your gas tax? Actually, the gas tax is on a gallon of gas not the price of gas so when gas prices rise consumption slows bringing in less revenue. And it is a state gas tax, the Portland region only gets 46 cents of each gas tax dollar we send to Salem.

In terms of what new local funding options we might select for consideration, it too early to tell. We have created a diverse 60-person to audit how PDOT currently spends it money, the list of identified needs and recommend funding options.

Of course, the best tax is one that somebody else pays. But I am intrigued with Seattle's approach of a three-legged funding source. Maybe a modest monthly basic street safety and maintenance fee, a smallish local gas tax, and some other revenue option. By looking at three modest funding sources instead of loading it all on to just one tax, we spread the pain as evenly as possible among all those who use the system.

I want to be sure we all see any fine print on the funding package options. For instance, at $40 million of new revenue per year, we can eliminate the safety and maintenance backlog in ten years. At $20 million annually, it will take 20 years. And any proposal I bring forward will show exactly when, where and how the money will be spent.

We knew before I rolled out this issue that this would be an unpopular but the early feedback from the town halls has been very encouraging. That said, I am cautiously optimistic we will have something to present to City Council in January. Since my funding efforts are focused on our maintenance and safety deficits, the regional and state funding efforts to expand transportation capacity must continue as well.

And whatever transportation package we may ultimately end up with, I guarantee it will include aggressive plans for more greenstreets. This year I sponsored the nation's first comprehensive greenstreets policy for a major city. As we build or rebuild streets, we'll employ greenstreet technology, which saves the taxpayer money because it addresses road-produced pollution close to the source instead of piping it to the treatment plant.

The solutions to our land use start with passage of a state ballot measure and extend to more robust development around transit stops.

It's imperative that we keep our land use laws in place - fix the parts that need fixing but keep them in place. Indeed, much of what Portland has done better than the rest of the country harkens back to previous generations of leadership who recognized the inextricable relationship between transportation and land use. Light rail, streetcar, safe streets for bicycling and walking - none of it is possible without land use laws that encourage a more compact and humane development pattern. When you receive your ballot this fall, get out that #2 pencil and take a good 10 seconds to darken that bubble in support of Measure 49.

We also need more vigorous transit station area development. The slow pace of redevelopment along the Yellow Line in North Portland concerns me. At my direction PDOT has initiated a review of the Banfield and I-205 transit stops to understand the barriers to redevelopment. We need a review of our zoning, building codes, planning practices, and market analyses as they relate to transit stations. Every transit station in the city should be a vibrant micro-community with its own unique sense of place and identity. We need to maximize the return on our multi-billion transit investments with station area development that makes walking, bicycling, and transit the easiest and best set of travel choices.

Our solutions to congestion need to be assertive and regional in scope. As the 3rd most trade dependent region in the nation, congestion is much more than just an inconvenience; it's the annual $1 billion hole in our pocket by 2025 if we do nothing.

We need modernize our freeways. But more importantly we need to reduce congestion by creating real alternatives to personal auto dependency. We must use our existing road right-of-way, fully 1/3rd of the city's land mass, more efficiently.

As I have already discussed, it's starts by fixing the basic infrastructure we already have and dramatically diversify our good travel choices. It's like any good investment portfolio: diversify, diversify, diversify.

So our solution to congestion must also move forward achievement of our global warming and peak oil goals. What would Portland look like if we implemented solutions to global warming and peak oil? Well, ironically enough, it would look a lot like Portland circa 1920 - a time when the main means of motion were your feet, streetcars and bikes - and maybe horses, but we should leave them in the pasture. In that era we had more than 100 miles of tracks. Streetcars were literally setting the footprint for how the city would grow. In fact, one of Portland's finest charms, our distinctive neighborhoods, is a direct result of our original streetcar grid.

To me it's obvious that we should grow what we know works and return the streetcar to its original stature in the city, along with lightrail. We are close to completing a nearly 30-year-old regional rail transit plan. So, we have initiated a citywide - followed by a region wide -- rail transit plan that will determine the best corridors for rail transit expansion.

For our new regional transit plan I foresee new light rail and express streetcar lines, more frequent bus service going more places, more car-sharing, bikes, bike boulevards and sidewalks and walking paths, appropriate auto use, and new deployment of transportation management associations -to ensure you could get where you need to go when you need to be there without you wanting to use your car.

And to ensure we are disciplined about linking transportation and land use planning I believe we should plan to accommodate our share of projected regional growth-Metro anticipates 300,000 more Portlanders by 2035-within ¼ mile of all existing and to-be-planned streetcar and lightrail transit stops. That will be a huge task but a worthwhile task. Why? Because it will simultaneously encourage responsible, transit-supportive development while protecting our existing single-family neighborhoods from undo growth.

With all the lightrail and streetcar projects underway or planned, it is fair to ask, do we really need more? My answer is an emphatic, "yes." As recently reported in the media, many of the cities that we compete with are doing much more than we are. Denver has 12 year program to build 119 miles of light rail and commuter rail. Houston has a $7.6 billion initiative to 73 miles of lightrail. Portland, we cannot afford to fall behind.

These efforts will relieve congestion by leaving the freeways and major streets for the most valuable travel trips - freight and those for whom transit, or carpooling or human motion is not a realistic choice.

Creating a true diversity of travel choices also means dealing with the disruptions of building it out and questions as to how to pay for it.

Right now there are over 30 current and planned public and private projects worth an estimated by some to be valued at $1 billion that impact the right-of-way in downtown. It is a Herculean task to keep things moving as normal as possible. But I meet with PDOT, TriMet, small business owners, resident and 35 other stakeholders meet every other week under the banner of "Keep Portland Moving" to provide assistance and coordinate the reduction of our collective impacts. We opened a hotline. If you see something that concerns you, call us at 503-865-MOVE. Live operators really are standing by to help. I do.

Given the $422 million maintenance repair bill already on the table, a natural follow-up question to any mention of a robust regional transit system is, "How do we pay for it?"

As I already mentioned, the funding options work underway on the state and regional level must go forward.

When it comes to streetcar, if you pick the right routes and they help pay for them selves; along our existing system we've seen more than $2.4 billion in private investment. The Burnside/Couch Couplet Streetcar is estimated to pay for itself in 14 years.

The federal government needs to refocus and return to its role as our nation-builder. Historically, the federal government has always picked up most of the tab for major infrastructural investment. In the 1950s Congress set the federal government's contribution to interstate freeway projects at 90%. Stop the war in Iraq and save $175 million each day. Impose a federal tax surcharge on excess oil company profits resulting from this price gouging.

And we should slap a surcharge for urban transit projects on national oil companies engaged in what appears to be price gouging while prices at the pump hover around $3 per gallon. U.S. Speaker of the House of Representative Nancy Pelosi is right when she calls the $97 billion dollar annual profits they made last year, "Obscene."

Duct-tape, bailing wire and band aids are apt metaphors for how we have funded our transit and transportation projects. But this approach will leave us falling behind of where we need to be for regional mobility.

So in the immediate term, we've got to invest in our basic roadway infrastructure. Access to safe, well-maintained streets is everybody's right, and consequently everybody's responsibility.

We must protect our land use laws to keep our wonderfully diverse mosaic of safe, livable neighborhoods that make Portland special. Congestion paired with anticipated growth isn't just a frustration; without alternatives it will be a billion dollar annual burden.

We must focus our response is to diversify our portfolio of travel choices, investing in real alternatives for around-town travel needs. And last by certainly not least, global warming and peak oil are basically the exclamation at the end of the travel choice sentence. The consequences of inaction are simply too dire to assume we can ignore them.

Taken together these actions will result in a "transportation transformation." Simply put, as the transportation commissioner of your city, I don't think we have a choice.

Remember that history is replete with examples of once-fine cities that grew complacent in their accomplishments and let innovation pass them by. In the 1980s when massive freeway expansion was still en vogue, some renegade city hiding in the car wash corner of America turned its back on the Mt. Hood Freeway, took the federal dollars, and tried the nation's first light rail system instead. Now it seems everybody's been to or coming to Portland, Oregon to experience first-hand what we've been up for the last twenty years.

Yes, we start ahead of other cities but we need invest in more. We already attract a disproportionate share of young, creative talent, in part because we've made smarter transportation investments than other cities. One nationally-renowned economist, Joe Cortright, says we're already reaping the benefits. Portlanders commute on average four fewer miles than the national average, saving us a collective $2.6 billion in fuel and time savings.

The transformation is how we get from here to Portland's transportation tomorrow. I hope you will join us.

Thank you.

HIRED: Kimberly Schneider, Senior Policy Director for Economic Development & Workforce Training

Warren Jimenez — Thu, 07 Jun 2007 10:52:02 -0700

Please welcome Kimberly Schneider, our new Senior Policy Director for Economic Development and Workforce Training. Kimberly is a proud native Portlander and comes from a family with strong experience in workforce development. In one sentence, her background is: Grant High, Colby College, Peace Corps in Burkina Faso, Harvard, Congressman Blumenauer's D.C. office. Feel free to contact Kimberly at 503.823.4541.

BLOG: It was a blast at the 45th St. annual Johns Parade

Sam Adams — Mon, 14 May 2007 00:15:52 -0700

Our heroes back from Iraq.The weather was warm without being too hot, bright but not too sunny (if that is possible this time of year!); I had a great time again participating in the 45th St. Johns Parade.

2007 St. Johns ParadeThe parade route started at Roosevelt High School at noon and ended at the St. Johns Community Center.

Not impressed with the politicians in the paradeThe St. Johns parade is the first time the Rose Festival Rose Princesses representing each of the city's high schools appear together in a parade.

I get a high score from some friendly judgesThe theme of the St. Johns Parade this year was, "Celebrate Community Volunteers." My thanks to all the volunteers who pull off the St. Johns parade in such an upbeat and organized fashion: another reason it makes me proud to be from North Portland.

Picking the best spot to watch the paradeIt was a grassroots event and drew a couple thousand spectators, more than last year.

Raffle tickets to win quiltI wore my, "Enjoy St. Johns," t-shirt (which you can pick up for yourself at The Man Shop, across from the St. Johns Plaza).

The Royal RosariansConcurrently with the parade, our neighborhood newspaper The St. Johns Sentinel hosted the St. Johns Bizarre. Local merchants sold crafts and gifts, live music and performances, as well as food and beer flowed.

Taking a little nap while waiting for parade to startSt. Johns is experiencing a major revitalization. New residents are moving in, longtime businesses that had languished are coming back and entrepreneurs are taking over vacant spaces.

Jimmy Johns, the founder of St. Johns neighborhoodTwo projects in St. Johns attracting a lot of interest these days are the potential redevelopment of the so-called Diamond Block that includes the city-owned St. Johns Racquet Club, 2131 N.E. Thompson St., and the completion of the North Portland Greenway Trail between Cathedral Park and Swan Island.

Oregon State Senator Margaret CarterSt. Johns was named after a reclusive hermit by the name of James "Jimmy" John (1809 - 1886) who started a Willamette River ferry between Linnton and St. Johns with a single small boat in 1852. John was a small, quiet man, with a keen, but dry, sense of humor. A man educated far beyond the average person of his day.

Some royality of our own.Where is the candy!John was 77 when he died at his home on May 27, 1886. John's Last Will and Testament, dated March 14, 1883 was prepared by John Catlin. He decreed that all proceeds from his estate be used to establish free schools for the children of the area and that the money should never be used to Kell's Irish bagpipespromote in those schools any one doctrine or religion "one more than another". He was buried in a pauper's grave at the Columbia Cemetery, which was not marked until 1909.

Parade watcher with festive hatPeople who knew him were divided in their opinions. Some called him friend, but others saw him as an 'eccentric', a 'recluse' and a 'demijohn'.

Boy Scout Troop 538Seeing a need to establish it's own local government the community incorporated on February 19, 1903. It survived on it's own for 12 year until requesting Snow cones for saleannexation to the City of Portland. Merger ballots for the City of St. Johns and the town of Linnton were held June 7, 1915. Both were approved and each became part of the City of Portland on July 8, 1915.

WILLAMETTE WEEK: A real break

Warren Jimenez — Wed, 09 May 2007 08:37:50 -0700

IMAGE: Matt ClarkA real break

Real-estate agents want to widen an unusual tax benefit.

BY NIGEL JAQUISS

A bill introduced by the Oregon Association of Realtors to extend a local income-tax exemption to more of its members could backfire on the whole industry.

The aim of House Bill 2541 is simple: to give principal real-estate brokers the same break on local taxes, such as Portland's business license fee, that rank-and-file real-estate brokers already enjoy.

Principal brokers are distinguished by their supervisory positions and by their "ownership" of listings, says the Realtors Association's government affairs director, Jana Jarvis.

But the bill, now in a Senate committee after the House approved it last month, raises a more fundamental question for Portland City Commissioner Sam Adams: Why aren't all real-estate agents paying local business taxes just like other independent contractors?

"I am searching for a legitimate reason why Realtors should be exempt from the business license fee, and other professional service providers, such as lawyers, doctors or physical therapists, should not," Adams says.

Currently, most businesses that operate in Portland, from sole proprietorships to large corporations, pay a 2.2 percent business license fee on net business income. The fee last year generated $62 million, or about 17 percent of Portland's discretionary general fund, according to Terri Williams, the city Revenue Bureau's license and tax division manager.

According to the City Attorney's office, the real-estate agents' tax break harks back to the early 1980s, when industry lobbyists persuaded legislators to classify brokers as contractors rather than employees.

The city responded by charging brokers an annual license fee on net income. But in 1987, the industry took care of that by getting an exemption from the Legislature. That exemption, however, did not include principal brokers.

Real estate is a big business locally. In 2006, according to the Regional Multiple Listing Service, 13,986 properties worth more than $4.3 billion sold in Multnomah County.

The RMLS says 3,276 brokers and 420 principal brokers do business in the county. The former are already exempt from paying the city tax, which Williams says costs the city up to $250,000 annually.

Ironically, Jarvis says, the impetus for the bill doesn't come from Portland. It comes instead from Medford, which has been trying to tax out-of-town brokers.

Nonetheless, Adams, who wrote changes this year that will reduce the BLF's impact on some small businesses, says it's time to examine the break for real-estate brokers.

"We spent months trying to reform the BLF last year and one of the questions that kept coming up was, why are real-estate brokers exempt?" Adams says.

Adding to the perception of inequity, Adams says, is that all real-estate brokers pay the Multnomah County business income tax, a substantially similar tax that costs nearly all companies doing business in the county 1.45 percent of their net business income.