Submitted by Amanda Fritz on September 30, 2008 - 2:53pm.
The Portland City Council Agenda for tomorrow and Thursday is the usual mixture of communications, reports, admistrative rules, contracts, and hearings. If I had time, I'd follow up on:
1357 Adopt City 2008-2012 Equal Employment Opportunity Affirmative Action Plan (Second Reading Agenda 1324)
It's a second reading, meaning I missed the report and hearing last week. There are simply not enough hours in the day any more.
On Wednesday afternoon, a land use case in SW:
1362 TIME CERTAIN: 2:00 PM - Consider the proposal of Mike and Pat Hartmann, applicants and Twin Properties LLC, listed property owner and the recommendation from the Hearings Officer for approval of a Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Zoning Map Amendment for a vacant lot abutting 11330 SW 64th Ave (Hearing; LU 08-103595 CP ZC)
*1363 Amend the Comprehensive Plan Map designations and change zoning at vacant lot abutting 11330 SW 64th Ave at the request of Mike and Pat Hartmann (Ordinance; LU 08-103595 CP ZC)
The most contentious hearing of the week will likely be on Thursday afternoon:
1364 TIME CERTAIN: 2:00 PM - Authorize a Ground Lease Agreement with Portland Hope Meadows for intergenerational housing at 4221 N Willis Blvd (Ordinance introduced by Commissioner Saltzman)
See Jim Redden's article in the Tribune for a summary. I plan to sit in on this hearing, or at least watch it on cable while catching up on my backlog of tasks.
I did make time to attend the hearing, although my attention was distracted immediately before and after by phone calls from my daughter, who had a severe allergic reaction to something she ate at the Southern Oregon University cafeteria. I was relieved to hear in her call from the Student Health Center immediately after this hearing, that she's OK.
I sat with my friend and land-use colleague Susan Landauer, who with two others spoke persuasively on behalf of the Portsmouth Neighborhood Association (PNA). As Commissioner Nick Fish said, they set the bar for a high standard of testimony from a community group.
It was unfortunate most of the testimony on both sides rehashed the underlying question of "is this a good site for this use?". That wasn't the question on the table yesterday. PNA astutely pointed out in their presentation that the real issue was whether Hope Meadows has adequate money for construction and operations. Very few speakers addressed that question. Only one or two speakers talked about potential mitigation strategies/benefitss for the neighborhood. Those issues deserved more review.
I was pleased Commissioner Leonard insisted on adequate time for the Neighborhood representatives to make their presentation, after an hour of testimony in favor by invited speakers for Hope Meadows. I also liked that Commissioner Saltzman invited the mother with small children to testify first.... seems like that could have happened long before the opening of general testimony. I was disappointed there was no discussion by the Council after the close of testimony. When citizens have taken time off work to sit through two hours in a hearing, the very least elected officials should do is give some indication of what they heard and how they might vote. Deferring all discussion to the vote at Second Reading means citizens have to take another day off work if they want to hear it in person.