An Honest Appraisal Or Rubber Stamp? 11/13/02

Members of the Portland Planning Commission:
Sometime during March 2003 you will be evaluating the first of several requests for a subdivision, type III review or street vacation related to the Housing Authority of Portland 's $200 million Columbia Villa remodel project. Because this is such a massive and contentious government building project you will need to take extra care in presenting your opinions. It is essential that your prejudices, preconceived notions, previous commitments and public housing policy preferences all be put on the public table long before you review and pass judgment on the merits or demerits of a project which will have an indelible affect on tens of thousands of lives in a very large section of our city for decades to come.

I strongly urge each of you as individual Commissioners and the Planning Commission as a whole to begin a public dialog amongst yourselves as well as with your fellow Portlanders. There are two dramatically different public housing policy options for you to consider. The first is the policy inherent in the $200 million Villa project which is:
A. Low income clients are best served by gathering as many of them as possible into a single compound of government owned buildings. This policy supports the herding of an overwhelming number of low-income people into the single neighborhood which already has the highest number of HAP low-income clients in the city of Portland, Multnomah county and the state of Oregon. It acknowledges that neighborhood stability and community balance are irrelevant to its purposes.

The second, which I believe is a better idea, is a public housing policy which I propose:
B. The following public policy shall provide a touchstone for all decisions regarding government support for Oregonians seeking housing assistance in this political jurisdiction.

1. Suitable shelter must be made available to every homeless person in this political jurisdiction before funds or support can be allocated to any other public housing program.

2. Providing rental vouchers directly to clients shall be the preferred method of housing. The development or use of government owned buildings for client housing shall be discouraged especially those that would create a large compound of structures which could be identified with the stigmatizing term “ghetto.”

3. In order to achieve neighborhood stability and community balance every effort will be made to create and employ financial, tax and other incentives or disincentives which will have the effect of evenly distributing the client base throughout every neighborhood in this political jurisdiction.

Regardless of which policy you support it is imperative that you discuss the matter publicly before the enormous weight and speed of the project forces you into a capitulated response reminiscent of the Planning Commission's Villa rezoning decision some months ago. At that time the Commission was predominately concerned that it might be responsible for HAP losing some federal funding. If the Planning Commission continues to hold the view that securing federal funds supersedes all other planning considerations then we should all know about that sooner rather than later. Are each of you as open minded and willing to stop this project as letting it go forward? Would you still be willing to vote against this project in spite of the fact that Commissioner Francesconi says the members of the City Council have already made up their minds? How does his admission affect your decision making process?

If the Portland Planning Commission is unable or unwilling to hold formal sessions to discuss this matter perhaps special informal sessions could be arranged. Failing that I would be willing to do a personal presentation with maps, charts and other materials for any individual Commissioner in public or private.

Planning Commission Mission
"To advise the City Council on any proposal that directly affects any goal or policy or the type, density, and location of any element of the City’s Comprehensive Plan. The Planning Commission may also, from time to time, review and comment on city policies and their implementation in relation to land use issues."

Before you advise and comment on HAP's $200 million project we want to hear what you think makes good and bad public housing policy. Thank you.