In this episode, we wanted to feature the minority perspective related to the council president vote. We hope to have Councilor Smith on the show in the coming months to discuss a different issue.
I participated in most of the Charter Commission’s public hearings and watched most of their meetings. I believe Avalos lost the election for council president because of the way she conducted herself during charter commission meetings. She railroaded many decisions yielding nothing to opponents. New council members with a background in government chose another because Avalos does not have the skills to be a successful leader.
Worth noting that Avalos is a very recent transplant to East Portland and, even though she had better name recognition, received a significantly smaller percentage of her district’s votes than Clark. Her backers were almost entirely DSA members, and their argument for her was almost entirely identity politics based.
I would have preferred Clark over EPG but I would have preferred a great many options over Avalos.
Dunphy is an early disappointment. Here’s hoping he can salvage things with his district by championing gun violence prevention.
Hi Max! Avalos is indeed a relatively new transplant to East Portland, and it’s also true that Clark received a larger initial vote share. But it’s worth noting that Avalos was the first candidate in East Portland to reach the threshold and be elected.
One thing about Rose City Reform is that we’re here to track and narrate the reform process, which means we approach things differently than traditional media. To me, it’s particularly interesting that the face of the reform coalition wasn’t elected council president. I’ve been covering Avalos as a key architect of reform since early 2022, and her perspective on this vote felt important to include. It’s part of the historical record we’re trying to create.
I appreciate you listening and reading! Our next episode will approach this subject from a slightly different angle. Stay tuned!
Maja, Did you know Avalos had an Amazon gift buying registry to furnish her new East Portland house right before she filed to run for office? Will those who contributed get any special favors from Ms Avalos?
Yeah, the gift giving occurred right before she filed. The whole thing seems very suspect to me—regarding the undue influence of personal gifts to a future candidate from those that gain to benefit from that individual's actions once in power.
I’m disappointed though not surprised we Portlanders won’t benefit from Avalos’ leadership in the council president role - at least not in this initial opportunity available to us through our newly elected city council. Seems it was inevitable for alliances to form between the status quo and those vulnerable to early credibility optics, at the unfortunate cost of securing the top council president candidate with facilitative track record and greatest potential for leading the transformative work at hand. Watching the council president election, I continue to be thoroughly impressed by Avalos’ leadership acumen, and her deft communications virtuosity across class, community and culture. Watching councilors stumble and grasp at attributing their stonewalling against her was about as painful as watching their “I’m a conservative liberal democrat” code-switching. However, I am deeply impressed by Pirtle-Guiney, and now all the more intrigued to watch what Avalos can now deliver as a whip, versus facilitator, of city council. Her track record bringing about governance reform results through charter reform, educational and community organizing, and on-the-ground mobilization for a variety of causes most tangible and apparent to the lived experience of Portlanders across the city is what this Portlander has long been pushing for in elected leadership. Thank you Councilor Avalos for your service and that to come. Thank you Councilor Dunphy and other councilors who extended their support for Councilor Avalos; you will do well to continue to follow her lead.
Thanks for reading! You bring up an important point, which is that the presidency comes with both pros and cons. The visibility and soft power is palpable; yet it can be challenging to pursue your own agenda without the perception of leveraging your position. There can only be on president, but that doesn’t mean there can only be one leader.
Avalos: As someone who designed the new Charter and city council election format (sitting on the charter commission) it seems unethical that she was even allowed to run for office.
Ethics are subjective and ultimately that’s up to voters to decide. The city attorney and the auditor have repeatedly stated that charter commissioners had no legal conflict of interest. Historically, there is also ample precedent for reformers running for office in the systems they help create, ranging from our framers to the civil rights leaders that fought for the majority-minority electoral districts we now consider the political norm but that didn’t exist until the 1960s.
It’s often been said about journalism that it’s “the first rough-draft of history.” In the spirit of helping history, I’m going to jump in with a couple questions of fact.
—Jamie Dunphy stated that, historically, 65% of the Portland City Council has come from southwest Portland. I’d love to see a source for that. According to a 2014 Oregonian article, “More than half of the 49 commissioners joined the council while living in just one 7-square-mile box bounded by: the current Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard, Northeast Alberta Street, 47th Avenue, Southeast Hawthorne Boulevard.”
The article has a clickable map that let’s you step through commissioner residences in five-year increments. It shows that many areas of Portland have had little representation. Play with the map, it’s fun!
—About the recent Council vote: please remember that six Councilors *did* switch their vote from their first-choice of Olivia Clark to their compromise candidate, Elana Pirtle-Guiney. The vote wasn’t the binary — Avalos, or not-Avalos — that Avalos supporters appear to view it as.
—“Underinvestment” in east Portland came up several times during the interview, without acknowledging the incredible success east Portland transportation advocates and representatives have had over the past decade in securing transportation dollars in an attempt to fix the area’s high crash corridors and intersections — over half a billion dollars according to the back of my napkin.
(And I'll point out that most of southwest Portland doesn't have a stormwater system, and consequently, has the least sidewalk coverage in the city. East Portland has twice the centerlined street coverage of southwest: 53% versus 25%).
One thing I’m really looking forward to with the reformed government is that representatives from all over Portland will be sitting at the same table hearing the same facts.
Thanks for reading, Lisa! I haven't done my own analysis of historic representation so I can't speak to the veracity of Jamie's claim. In terms of EPG, she was indeed the compromise candidate for the majority. She was not a compromise candidate for five of the councilors, including the ones interviewed here, but in the days since, they have extended their congratulations and support, which I think speaks to EPG's level of respect among members.
The distribution of resources with regards to infrastructure, etc, is going to be fascinating going forward, and it will be interesting to see what specific asks councilors make. I was intrigued by Eric Zimmerman's comment during the council president vote that he was willing to prioritize East Portland, something he also alluded to during his introduction of Julia Brim-Edwards at her swearing-in ceremony. It's going to be a fascinating budget season!
Sounds like it will be more discrimination against the West Side. They're all privileged, wealthy and white right? They can pay for their own private security and install their own sidewalks…./s
Any reason Loretta wasn’t part of the conversation!
In this episode, we wanted to feature the minority perspective related to the council president vote. We hope to have Councilor Smith on the show in the coming months to discuss a different issue.
Thanks for the reply
I participated in most of the Charter Commission’s public hearings and watched most of their meetings. I believe Avalos lost the election for council president because of the way she conducted herself during charter commission meetings. She railroaded many decisions yielding nothing to opponents. New council members with a background in government chose another because Avalos does not have the skills to be a successful leader.
Worth noting that Avalos is a very recent transplant to East Portland and, even though she had better name recognition, received a significantly smaller percentage of her district’s votes than Clark. Her backers were almost entirely DSA members, and their argument for her was almost entirely identity politics based.
I would have preferred Clark over EPG but I would have preferred a great many options over Avalos.
Dunphy is an early disappointment. Here’s hoping he can salvage things with his district by championing gun violence prevention.
Hi Max! Avalos is indeed a relatively new transplant to East Portland, and it’s also true that Clark received a larger initial vote share. But it’s worth noting that Avalos was the first candidate in East Portland to reach the threshold and be elected.
One thing about Rose City Reform is that we’re here to track and narrate the reform process, which means we approach things differently than traditional media. To me, it’s particularly interesting that the face of the reform coalition wasn’t elected council president. I’ve been covering Avalos as a key architect of reform since early 2022, and her perspective on this vote felt important to include. It’s part of the historical record we’re trying to create.
I appreciate you listening and reading! Our next episode will approach this subject from a slightly different angle. Stay tuned!
Maja, Did you know Avalos had an Amazon gift buying registry to furnish her new East Portland house right before she filed to run for office? Will those who contributed get any special favors from Ms Avalos?
Yes, I did. I follow her on social media. However, as you stated, that was before she ran for public office.
Yeah, the gift giving occurred right before she filed. The whole thing seems very suspect to me—regarding the undue influence of personal gifts to a future candidate from those that gain to benefit from that individual's actions once in power.
I’m disappointed though not surprised we Portlanders won’t benefit from Avalos’ leadership in the council president role - at least not in this initial opportunity available to us through our newly elected city council. Seems it was inevitable for alliances to form between the status quo and those vulnerable to early credibility optics, at the unfortunate cost of securing the top council president candidate with facilitative track record and greatest potential for leading the transformative work at hand. Watching the council president election, I continue to be thoroughly impressed by Avalos’ leadership acumen, and her deft communications virtuosity across class, community and culture. Watching councilors stumble and grasp at attributing their stonewalling against her was about as painful as watching their “I’m a conservative liberal democrat” code-switching. However, I am deeply impressed by Pirtle-Guiney, and now all the more intrigued to watch what Avalos can now deliver as a whip, versus facilitator, of city council. Her track record bringing about governance reform results through charter reform, educational and community organizing, and on-the-ground mobilization for a variety of causes most tangible and apparent to the lived experience of Portlanders across the city is what this Portlander has long been pushing for in elected leadership. Thank you Councilor Avalos for your service and that to come. Thank you Councilor Dunphy and other councilors who extended their support for Councilor Avalos; you will do well to continue to follow her lead.
Thanks for reading! You bring up an important point, which is that the presidency comes with both pros and cons. The visibility and soft power is palpable; yet it can be challenging to pursue your own agenda without the perception of leveraging your position. There can only be on president, but that doesn’t mean there can only be one leader.
Candace Avalos is Joanne Hardesty 2.0. She’ll be one and done.
Avalos: As someone who designed the new Charter and city council election format (sitting on the charter commission) it seems unethical that she was even allowed to run for office.
Ethics are subjective and ultimately that’s up to voters to decide. The city attorney and the auditor have repeatedly stated that charter commissioners had no legal conflict of interest. Historically, there is also ample precedent for reformers running for office in the systems they help create, ranging from our framers to the civil rights leaders that fought for the majority-minority electoral districts we now consider the political norm but that didn’t exist until the 1960s.
Thank you for the informative interview, Maja.
It’s often been said about journalism that it’s “the first rough-draft of history.” In the spirit of helping history, I’m going to jump in with a couple questions of fact.
—Jamie Dunphy stated that, historically, 65% of the Portland City Council has come from southwest Portland. I’d love to see a source for that. According to a 2014 Oregonian article, “More than half of the 49 commissioners joined the council while living in just one 7-square-mile box bounded by: the current Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard, Northeast Alberta Street, 47th Avenue, Southeast Hawthorne Boulevard.”
Is the Oregonian incorrect?
https://projects.oregonlive.com/maps/eastpdx/power/
The article has a clickable map that let’s you step through commissioner residences in five-year increments. It shows that many areas of Portland have had little representation. Play with the map, it’s fun!
—About the recent Council vote: please remember that six Councilors *did* switch their vote from their first-choice of Olivia Clark to their compromise candidate, Elana Pirtle-Guiney. The vote wasn’t the binary — Avalos, or not-Avalos — that Avalos supporters appear to view it as.
—“Underinvestment” in east Portland came up several times during the interview, without acknowledging the incredible success east Portland transportation advocates and representatives have had over the past decade in securing transportation dollars in an attempt to fix the area’s high crash corridors and intersections — over half a billion dollars according to the back of my napkin.
(And I'll point out that most of southwest Portland doesn't have a stormwater system, and consequently, has the least sidewalk coverage in the city. East Portland has twice the centerlined street coverage of southwest: 53% versus 25%).
https://www.portland.gov/transportation/pbot-projects/lid-projects/documents/portland-street-surfaces-neighborhood-map/download
One thing I’m really looking forward to with the reformed government is that representatives from all over Portland will be sitting at the same table hearing the same facts.
Thanks for reading, Lisa! I haven't done my own analysis of historic representation so I can't speak to the veracity of Jamie's claim. In terms of EPG, she was indeed the compromise candidate for the majority. She was not a compromise candidate for five of the councilors, including the ones interviewed here, but in the days since, they have extended their congratulations and support, which I think speaks to EPG's level of respect among members.
The distribution of resources with regards to infrastructure, etc, is going to be fascinating going forward, and it will be interesting to see what specific asks councilors make. I was intrigued by Eric Zimmerman's comment during the council president vote that he was willing to prioritize East Portland, something he also alluded to during his introduction of Julia Brim-Edwards at her swearing-in ceremony. It's going to be a fascinating budget season!
"It's going to be a fascinating budget season!"
Sounds like it will be more discrimination against the West Side. They're all privileged, wealthy and white right? They can pay for their own private security and install their own sidewalks…./s