Oregon needs statewide tax reform. Which leads to the question: What’s a major tax reform proposal that you think would start at 55% or better before the opposition messaging starts? (Spoiler: no one has found one yet…)
The first city? I think you’re talking about Seattle. And yeah, the money printer is in full effect.
Terry, you should review the rules again. See FAQ item #2.
www.oregon.gov/ogec/Public-...
It’s more that land use decisions are based on land use law. They’re not legislative decisions where policymakers can consider whatever factors they want. If you want a different outcome, you have to change state land use law.
you’re fired. wait you’re rehired. email us a list of things you’ve done today wait forget it you’re fired again. come back your job was important. you’re fired. or hired. come in to the office. wait the office has no computers go home. we are the department of government efficiency.
Wow. The Trump effect.
Practically none of the 18 zillion people on here who blame the DNC for things it has no control over are angry about it screwing up one of the few things it does.
Come on morons, get angry, this is your time to shine!
www.nytimes.com/2025/03/01/u...
Makes me crazy when they talk about legislation and refuse to mention the bill number they’re talking about.
I have been under the impression that the data is owned and controlled by the DNC, while NGP VAN is the user interface to access it; and there are other interfaces accessing the same data. Is that not true?
As of today, a new term has entered our language. A “rubio” is a spineless lump of nothing. Example: Don’t be such a rubio.
I guess? That’s a 100% factual statement. And I’m proud to be working to activate Portland’s nightlife and bring this city back from the brink. Would love to chat more over coffee.
Mostly because there aren’t any flat-floor rock venues bigger than Crystal Ballroom (1500) and smaller than Moda’s Theater of the Clouds (6000). Any act that draws 2000-3000 skips Portland.
Thankfully, that’s getting fixed in about 2 yrs with the construction of the new Water St rock hall.
You know why, right?
So… we raised the price of a thing, and thus, the buyers of that thing bought less of it. This seems entirely expected.
To be clear: I support higher wages and lower overtime thresholds to push employers toward more reasonable schedules. But yeah, fewer hours per worker will result. Is this good?
Yeah, probably. Though I can understand places like Leavenworth, WA and Sisters, OR where the economy is built on maintaining a particular visual style. But otherwise, yes, very dumb.
Outside of historic or cultural districts, design review is dumb. Create clear rules (like setbacks and parking) and then let builders build. If they want to paint it pink, let that happen! More housing, faster. No more delays!
I mean, publishing every American’s taxable income would be a good thing! Let’s have National Jealousy Day, like Finland!
www.weforum.org/stories/2018...
I assume it’s because they don’t own the property.
Great story about Portland’s new mayor, Ted Lasso, er, Keith Wilson by @shanedkavanaugh.bsky.social
www.oregonlive.com/politics/202...
Checking in from Portland. How many housing units will this measure produce?
I love this idea.
Minneapolis and St. Paul are a beautiful natural experiment in housing policy. Two choices. Two very different outcomes. Sadly, Portland is on the St. Paul track.
The single best thing we can do to reduce climate impact is to RAPIDLY scale up infill housing production to reduce commutes. Novick knows it and has made this argument before. Now, how do we clear the barriers and incentivize massive private investment in housing?
C’mon Portland!
I’m not saying we shouldn’t do it. I’m saying we’re thinking too small. This is not a $50 million problem. It’s a $5 billion problem. Every year.
My concern is that the public might think that the problem is solved. “Yay, we voted! All done!” and then when not much housing is built, and rents keep climbing, they get frustrated. And again, it solves about 1% of the problem. We need ~15k units PER YEAR in Portland, 36k statewide.
In Portland, it would solve about 1% of the problem. So yeah, it’s nice. But not if it undermines public support for actually taking the big steps required to have a meaningful impact.
Not an either/or! It’s nice. But this would not even begin to make a dent in the thousands of housing units we need in Portland. I mean, one ten-story apartment building is about $100 million.
