forced a compromise.
(Photo © Jonathan Maus)
Whew. A lot has transpired with the Safe, Sound, and Green Streets Proposal in recent weeks.
First, some background…
The monumental proposal will look to raise over $400 million for transportation system maintenance and safety projects by way of a new fee charged to city residents and businesses. Some of the funding in the proposal would go toward creation of a network of streets that are safe and convenient for bikes (more info here).
After hearing opposition and the threat of a referral effort from lobbyist Paul Romain at its first reading at City Council back on January 9th, Commissioner Sam Adams re-worked the proposal.
Adams reported on his blog that those revisions were meant, in part, to thwart any legal challenges to the proposal. The local media pounced on one change in particular; Adams split the proposal up into three parts, which would have made a referral attempt much more difficult (three times the amount of signatures would have be collected).
While Adams said he was just strengthening the proposal from legal challenges, the other side saw this as nothing more than political maneuvering and Romain, representing convenience stores who opposed their fee level, made sure to get his point across.
Even Mayor Potter expressed his misgivings about how Adams’ move might be perceived by the public.
Set on a clear collision course, (and with implications for the mayoral race) Adams and Romain struck a compromise early yesterday. As reported in the Willamette Week,
“The compromise entails creating a new classification for convenience and small grocery stores which will be billed at a lower rate…and gasoline distributors will be first in line to have their street maintenance fees lowered if the State Legislature passes a gas tax increase.”
According to Commissioner Adams’ office, this compromise will cut an estimated $500,000 $75,000 from the $24 million a year income the city expects to get from the fees.
City Council will vote on the proposal next week (1/30) and it is widely expected to pass.
Thanks for reading.
BikePortland has served this community with independent community journalism since 2005. We rely on subscriptions from readers like you to survive. Your financial support is vital in keeping this valuable resource alive and well.
Please subscribe today to strengthen and expand our work.
Politics at work. Sounds like a fair compromise. I applaud Sam\’s countermove to Romaine\’s threat. I\’m glad they compromised before it got too ugly. I think this tax increase is important enough to just get it passed rather than deal with all the strife inherent in a general ballot. Count me as one of those who don\’t always believe in the immaculate will of the people to make the best choice. Sometimes, we need to take some bitter medicine if it benefits the community at large.
-Ian
yippee!!!
When do we start building the over 100 miles of new bicycle boulevards?
This is the kind of leadership that has been missing in Potterville over the last few years.
Anyone that can keep the oil-lobby from killing our local effort deserves our praise and our vote.
nice work….
I support Sam\’s efforts at creating this fee – it is better than nothing. The only problem I have with it is that I like the original fee structure/ proportionality (2006/7 proposal).
This one seems to have gone too soft on all the commercial interests who clog the streets with cars and fight bike lanes/ sidewalks.
Perhaps it is time to implement Shoup\’s Parking Benefit Districts along all the arterials and in town residential areas – Sam has been interested in this before. Pay if you park it. And then share the revenue on maintenance projects and neighborhood priorities (trees, transit, schools, sidewalks, etc.)
I\’m looking forward to seeing how the City that Works works on wasting more tax dollars.
I do not disagree that the transportation system needs repairs adn improvements and additions. I just wish the city had paid more attention to maintenance int he past, rather than concentrating on not so useful projects, illconceived and poorly overseen. With resulting poor outomes and cost over runs.
As for parking benefits districts, well, the City probably wishes to be careful about making the inner core of the city too hard to do business in, given the reality of our (for now) car centric economy. This is not an easy city to live in and do business in, if you both live and work in the core of the city. That said, I know that along many arterials, residential neighbors are experiencing more and more conflict, as time passes and more and more arterials have been renewed with new businesses, restaurants, etc, with parking competition from business patrons and bus commuters using residential areas for day parking.
This is why I want Sam for mayor. He knows when to hold em, and knows when to fold em. Sam knows what bills are worth making compromises on, and which ones to let go.
Keep up the great work!