By Eben Askins and Julie Sabatier

This year's races for mayor and city council offer progressives some interesting if less-than-ideal choices. The mayoral contest offers two candidates with distinctly different approaches. City Commissioner Jim Francesconi has called for several audits and overhauls in order to make practical changes. Former Chief of Police, Tom Potter, favors increased accountability and citizen involvement.

"Any public group, especially the police, have to be ultimately accountable to the community," said Potter. He hopes to increase dialogue between the public and the police by including citizens in the hiring and training of officers. "My whole philosophy about government is that we need to build into the system ways of reducing the negative impact of the system itself," he said. What exactly that negative impact is, Potter did not elucidate.

Francesconi, like Potter, supports many of the recommendations made by the Los Angeles-based Police Assessment Resource Center (PARC) report ordered by Portland City Council to review officer-involved shootings and deaths in custody. He favors including citizens in the police review process and expanding that process to include all excessive force, tort and negligence claims against the city. "Chief Foxworth has brought together outside police agencies to review police shootings in Portland," said Francesconi. "I want to make sure there are civilians included on that as well."

On the PGE buyout, Potter and Francesconi take markedly different views. Potter states that he has not made up his mind. On the one hand, the he is concerned about "hidden costs" in the public utility, but also seems genuinely concerned about Texas Pacific and how their acquisition would affect the ratepayers of Portland. "The primary function of the mayor is to protect the public," said Potter.

Francesconi is clear about the his position on the subject of PGE. "I think that Texas Pacific's offer is not good," he said. According to the candidate, the offer does not include enough rate relief or green power options. He also expressed apprehension about the liability to city ratepayers - a sentiment that both candidates seem to have perfected in their stump speeches.

Potter expressed concern over the fact that PGE services only a portion of Portland residents. "I think there is an equity issue that we can work out in some other area," he said. "Perhaps those ratepayers [PacifiCorp's consumers] would get an additional break from the city."

Francesconi also weighed in on the service debate. "We would have to build another power plant when PGE serves all of Portland [and] I think it puts our ratepayers at risk," he said.

When the subject turned to home ownership and gentrification, Francesconi laid out a two-tiered plan. First, he wants to use union pension funds to lower the rates of down payments for city employees, specifically teachers - a tactic with which he has been successful in the past. Second, he plans to elicit finances from the Portland Development Commission to help minority home ownership.

Potter is slightly more vague in his assessment of home ownership. He made it quite clear that he is "a strong advocate for affordable housing." He wants to keep families together and help nurture the transition from renters to owners. Potter also expressed interest in the PDC and the Housing and Development Bureau as viable options.

One issue that on which the candidates agree is implementing change to help local businesses. Potter made bold predictions about what he would do in his first year as mayor, stating he wants to hold a "business summit in my first 90 days" and help initiate a "community process whereby we develop a vision and long-term plan for our city."

He intends to discard a "one-size-fits-all" tax system for businesses - a reference to the licensing fees that have caused many small businesses to start operating in the red. How he wants to reform these fees and what "community processes" he wants to engage in, remain to be seen.

Francesconi's message is equally murky and his language equally uplifting. He plans to use the business income tax to "favor local businesses in the awarding of city contracts." He also mentioned the PDC again, as a buoy to target small businesses as part of his local business strategy.

Both candidates for mayor may leave voters with a bad taste in their mouths.

Neither the former Police Chief nor the lame duck Parks Commissioner have any real agendas that constituents can sink their teeth into.

Potter envisions a Portland that is more community-oriented, where decisions can be made minus the red tape and without too much posturing. He is appealing to the populist in all of us. "I don't think the role of government is to create jobs, I think it is to create the environment where jobs can flourish," he said.

Francesconi is relying on his brief tenure as a Portland civil servant to persuade voters that he is qualified to lead the city. "Look at the records of both [candidates] - not just what we say but what we have done over our careers to actually help people," he said. Unfortunately for Francesconi, his record-breaking fundraising campaign was not enough to persuade voters in the primary.

Adam vs. Fish

Whichever candidate takes office - Potter or Francesconi - his voice will have to join the chorus of city commissioners. "We essentially have five mayors," according to Nick Fish, candidate for City Council. Fish, and his opponent, Sam Adams, are vying for Francesconi's seat as mayor number three.

The candidates' platforms are virtually indistinguishable. Both want to increase public involvement in city government, both call for an audit of the police review process and each of them has what they call a "strategic plan." The differences lie in their approaches to implementing change, what both men refer to as "shaking up" City Hall. Fish sees himself as a refreshing voice from the populace, who can offer innovative, new solutions to old problems. On the other hand, Adams comes from within the system. He hopes to use his experience as Mayor Katz's chief of staff to focus on a detailed approach to make City Council more efficient at meeting the needs of the people it serves.

"Portland has a pretty incestuous form of government," said Adams, "especially the budget process." He proposes expanding the budget committee to include five citizens. He says he hopes this will add fresh voices to the process as well as foster diversity, which the all-white council lacks. In addition, Adams proposes the creation of a utility board, which will bring in experts on utility and environmental issues.

Fish also wants to take what he referred to as "budget stuff" out of City Hall and put it before the public. He proposed a number of superficial but potentially effective measures to increase public involvement: he wants to hold council meetings in the evenings, publish the council's agenda in mainstream media and provide regular updates to citizens who testify at City Hall.

"Our citizen participation has grown stale," he said, "and people are forced to play defense out in the neighborhoods and that, I think, has had significant negative consequences for our civic debate."

The candidates have even fewer differences when it comes to their views on Portland's police and its review board. They are both quick to sing the praises of the PARC report. Adams favors instituting a similar outside audit on a regular basis. However, he was vague about his stand on the current review process.

"I don't know whether its doing a good job or a bad job, but it's an issue I have deep concern about," said Adams. (Evidently, he's not quite concerned enough to know what kind of a job it's doing, though.) He went on to say that he would support a review board that produced systemic change as well as justice for individuals.

Fish, who is backed by a police department endorsement, said he would support an outside audit of the review board as well. He, too, was vague about what changes he thinks the process needs. "I'll use the relationship I have with the police association to be an honest broker," he said.

The two candidates do have some distinct viewpoints when it comes to low-income housing, specifically the Dignity Village project. "Dignity Village is an opportunity for homeless families to stay together," said Adams, "but it must be a stepping stone for people getting off the street."

While Adams tentatively offered support for Dignity Village as a temporary solution to the city's homelessness problem, Fish denounced it as a failure. "It's not decent, safe and sanitary," said Fish. "We know that it doesn't represent the best that we can offer because it's next to a dump out at the airport. It isn't a place where you or I would want to live." Fish, who has worked on a number of housing projects in the past, supports more traditional models that do not involve tents, dumps or airports.

Each candidate expressed some anxiety about the upcoming presidential election and the consequences it may have for Portland. "I think Portland is in a very vulnerable point in its life as a city," said Adams. "We are running out of land for the first time and we need to do a more strategic job making decisions about the city." He expressed the need for a "back-up plan" for increased job loss due to "misguided policies of the federal government."

Fish was more outspoken about his opposition to the current administration. "We don't have a partner in Washington right now," he said, "and for me to be successful, it matters who is president."
In Portland, the race is not as cut and dried. Many will complain that Fish and Adams are virtually indistinguishable. As we draw closer to November, this race has become about one thing: what kind of experience will serve the city best.

"When you've been [at City Hall] a long time, you become a captive of the place," said Fish in a not-so-subtle dig at his opponent. "You don't see it from the vantage-point of the customers, the rest of us," he continued.

Preferring to call a spade a spade, Adams said, "I can back up my campaign theme to shake up City Hall with real results. I encourage folks to look at both candidates because Nick can't."

These center-leaning democrats may leave something to be desired when it comes to progressive politics, but in many ways, their platforms are more appealing than either mayoral candidate.

Eben Askins is a local writer and activist. Julie Sabatier is a freelance writer and editor. e-mail: j2sabatier@yahoo.com.