Why aren't those employees back in the office downtown? Now Mayor Wilson is holding off until 2026 for that to happen? What's going to change in 2026? One word....Weak! 😫
So far Wilson is a Ted Wheeler 2.0. Lots of nice sounding words but no action. Keith has 10.5 months left to end unsanctioned camping. I haven't' seen any improvement.
It's not going to happen. JVP is stilling having her favorite nonprofits passing out tents, tarps and drug paraphernalia. Enabling these folks to live outside comfortably is not going to get them into "nighttime" shelters. 🤔
So true. Portland voters never cease to amaze me. They elect softie Wilson thinking he’s gonna solve homelessness when the money, responsibility and majority of control rests with Multnomah County. And we have elected 2 enablers (Deb Kafoury and Jessica Vega Pedesron) to run it and just handed JVP two more supporters in Singleton and Moyer (instead of Morzysky and Adams).
Great piece. I would definitely say strong mayor, if not obviously so. Your discussion here and report gives only brief mention to the Mayor’s increased power in the primary way governments exercise power: the budgeting process. With the previous structure, a less representative City Council had more power in helping develop the draft budget (in their capacity as Bureau chiefs) earlier in the budget process. Now a more representative City Council is in the position of responding to the Mayor’s proposed budget and public input and trying to make amendments within a narrower window much later in the process and without the Bureau information and expertise they had before. Budget Office staff are now talking a lot about “more civic engagement” but structurally there are actually fewer opportunities for residents & City Councilors to meaningfully engage.
Despite the best efforts of some Charter Commissioners, new mechanisms of participatory democracy and a more democratic budgeting process are among the issues that recent charter reform left unfinished.
Well, it’s hard to get “best effort” from a charter commission that was unelected, unrepresentative, non-diverse and identity group filled. Even mild mannered Vadim Morzysky resigned in protest for the shenanigans that took place.
Analyzing the provisions in a municipal charter is an appropriate place to begin understanding and predicting the process for making decisions, especially the incentives resulting from the specific powers given to the officials. It is not the place to end. Chicago has a reputation as a strong mayor city but in terms of its charter provisions, it's mayor is weak. The strength of Chicago's mayor arose from, for example, the intersection of electoral politics, patronage, and other features not necessarily specified in Chicago's charter. The creation of neighborhood associations able to influence decisions within Portland's Commission form of government arguably introduced a similar dynamic here, at least for a time. More significantly, Jim Svara's reference to the ambitions of the mayor merits elaboration. The ambitions of the council members matter, too--not only with respect to policy outcomes but also with respect to their careers in public office. They're each elected within one district or jurisdiction but might have ambitions to win an election in a larger one, affecting their decision-making. Moreover, as the Council organizes its work by committee, new power centers will arise to the extent that committee chairs make decisions about committee agendas and committee members defer to the expertise that members develop on other committees, which sets the stage for outcomes that don't follow directly from the provisions outlined in a charter. One can't take the politics out of politics.
"The creation of neighborhood associations able to influence decisions within Portland's Commission form of government arguably introduced a similar dynamic here…"
Steven,
Having been involved in a NA I would argue that the NA's have minimal impact on the path of Portland city government. To me by far the strongest influencers in Portland government are the taxpayer funded non-profits. We essentially have a shadow government of taxpayer funded NGO's. They're unaccountable yet get money earmarked to them by elected officials who then benefit politically from their support.
Why aren't those employees back in the office downtown? Now Mayor Wilson is holding off until 2026 for that to happen? What's going to change in 2026? One word....Weak! 😫
So far Wilson is a Ted Wheeler 2.0. Lots of nice sounding words but no action. Keith has 10.5 months left to end unsanctioned camping. I haven't' seen any improvement.
It's not going to happen. JVP is stilling having her favorite nonprofits passing out tents, tarps and drug paraphernalia. Enabling these folks to live outside comfortably is not going to get them into "nighttime" shelters. 🤔
So true. Portland voters never cease to amaze me. They elect softie Wilson thinking he’s gonna solve homelessness when the money, responsibility and majority of control rests with Multnomah County. And we have elected 2 enablers (Deb Kafoury and Jessica Vega Pedesron) to run it and just handed JVP two more supporters in Singleton and Moyer (instead of Morzysky and Adams).
Weak or Strong mayor? Do we even need to ask that question?
1) No vote or veto power (except in a tie)
2) We elected a Ted Wheeler 2.0 So far he seems equally as spineless.
So yes the mayor of Portland is weak due to structural and personality issues.
Great piece. I would definitely say strong mayor, if not obviously so. Your discussion here and report gives only brief mention to the Mayor’s increased power in the primary way governments exercise power: the budgeting process. With the previous structure, a less representative City Council had more power in helping develop the draft budget (in their capacity as Bureau chiefs) earlier in the budget process. Now a more representative City Council is in the position of responding to the Mayor’s proposed budget and public input and trying to make amendments within a narrower window much later in the process and without the Bureau information and expertise they had before. Budget Office staff are now talking a lot about “more civic engagement” but structurally there are actually fewer opportunities for residents & City Councilors to meaningfully engage.
Despite the best efforts of some Charter Commissioners, new mechanisms of participatory democracy and a more democratic budgeting process are among the issues that recent charter reform left unfinished.
Well, it’s hard to get “best effort” from a charter commission that was unelected, unrepresentative, non-diverse and identity group filled. Even mild mannered Vadim Morzysky resigned in protest for the shenanigans that took place.
Analyzing the provisions in a municipal charter is an appropriate place to begin understanding and predicting the process for making decisions, especially the incentives resulting from the specific powers given to the officials. It is not the place to end. Chicago has a reputation as a strong mayor city but in terms of its charter provisions, it's mayor is weak. The strength of Chicago's mayor arose from, for example, the intersection of electoral politics, patronage, and other features not necessarily specified in Chicago's charter. The creation of neighborhood associations able to influence decisions within Portland's Commission form of government arguably introduced a similar dynamic here, at least for a time. More significantly, Jim Svara's reference to the ambitions of the mayor merits elaboration. The ambitions of the council members matter, too--not only with respect to policy outcomes but also with respect to their careers in public office. They're each elected within one district or jurisdiction but might have ambitions to win an election in a larger one, affecting their decision-making. Moreover, as the Council organizes its work by committee, new power centers will arise to the extent that committee chairs make decisions about committee agendas and committee members defer to the expertise that members develop on other committees, which sets the stage for outcomes that don't follow directly from the provisions outlined in a charter. One can't take the politics out of politics.
"The creation of neighborhood associations able to influence decisions within Portland's Commission form of government arguably introduced a similar dynamic here…"
Steven,
Having been involved in a NA I would argue that the NA's have minimal impact on the path of Portland city government. To me by far the strongest influencers in Portland government are the taxpayer funded non-profits. We essentially have a shadow government of taxpayer funded NGO's. They're unaccountable yet get money earmarked to them by elected officials who then benefit politically from their support.