Vadim Mozyrsky believes that Portland's government needs reform but is reportedly launching a new PAC in opposition to the Charter Commission's proposals. He explains how Portland can do better.
Mr. Mozyrsky appears quite disingenuous when he describes Charter commission's proposals as a "hodgepodge of special-interest changes." That is not a fair or accurate characterization of Commission’s work and the majority decision (17 out of 20) for reform by the independent Charter Commission. The Commission deliberated for over 18 months, heard from hundreds of Portlanders, and weighed the pros and cons of various changes to the structure of government that could serve to advance, balance, and integrate goals related to equity, accountability, and participation. There is not perfect "structure of government" but the Commissioners landed on a suite of reforms that address the worst problems with Portland's existing, outdated form of government. They have sought a more equitable representation for a City- unlike most others in the US- where racial and ethnic minorities are diffuse rather than concentrated. This is why the vast majority of the Commission proposed multi-member districts; they will provide more equitable representation on the City Council for the foreseeable future.
There is not perfect structure of government; we must evaluate the proposed changes relative to the existing government structure and the unique conditions in Portland at this historic moment. That has been the Charter Commission's work.
There is lots in Mr. Mozyrksy's arguments here that appear want to scare Portlanders into opposing needed and beneficial change. If Commission's proposal is unique to the United States, it is because thankfully they explored municipal governance across the globe and did not limit their research to just models within the United States. Moreover, it is entirely appropriate that the Charter Commission did not craft the district boundaries under their proposal if for no other reason that many Charter Commissioners- including Mr. Mozyrksy- were current or past candidates for City Council. The districts will be drawn by an independent commission supported with the appropriate technical information specific to this purpose, as they should.
There is more that could be said of Mr. Mozyrsky's claims here. I very much hope The Way publishes the counter view.
I grew up in Portland and have observed Portland's antiquated, inefficient government since the 1980s. It may have served Portland well at one time; it clearly does not any longer. I believe the Charter Commission has served Portlanders very well in developing a set of thoughtful, balanced and, very much overdue, suite of charter amendments. If adopted by the voters, they will provide a more unified and integrated city administration accountable to a much more equitable system of representation and more participatory and meaningful voting process.
Mr. Mozyrsky appears quite disingenuous when he describes Charter commission's proposals as a "hodgepodge of special-interest changes." That is not a fair or accurate characterization of Commission’s work and the majority decision (17 out of 20) for reform by the independent Charter Commission. The Commission deliberated for over 18 months, heard from hundreds of Portlanders, and weighed the pros and cons of various changes to the structure of government that could serve to advance, balance, and integrate goals related to equity, accountability, and participation. There is not perfect "structure of government" but the Commissioners landed on a suite of reforms that address the worst problems with Portland's existing, outdated form of government. They have sought a more equitable representation for a City- unlike most others in the US- where racial and ethnic minorities are diffuse rather than concentrated. This is why the vast majority of the Commission proposed multi-member districts; they will provide more equitable representation on the City Council for the foreseeable future.
There is not perfect structure of government; we must evaluate the proposed changes relative to the existing government structure and the unique conditions in Portland at this historic moment. That has been the Charter Commission's work.
There is lots in Mr. Mozyrksy's arguments here that appear want to scare Portlanders into opposing needed and beneficial change. If Commission's proposal is unique to the United States, it is because thankfully they explored municipal governance across the globe and did not limit their research to just models within the United States. Moreover, it is entirely appropriate that the Charter Commission did not craft the district boundaries under their proposal if for no other reason that many Charter Commissioners- including Mr. Mozyrksy- were current or past candidates for City Council. The districts will be drawn by an independent commission supported with the appropriate technical information specific to this purpose, as they should.
There is more that could be said of Mr. Mozyrsky's claims here. I very much hope The Way publishes the counter view.
I grew up in Portland and have observed Portland's antiquated, inefficient government since the 1980s. It may have served Portland well at one time; it clearly does not any longer. I believe the Charter Commission has served Portlanders very well in developing a set of thoughtful, balanced and, very much overdue, suite of charter amendments. If adopted by the voters, they will provide a more unified and integrated city administration accountable to a much more equitable system of representation and more participatory and meaningful voting process.