Terry J. Harris

Susan Myers, the commission’s executive director, called the FAQ a “living document.” “I want to stress, because everyone has been saying, ‘You guys need to rescind this,’ It’s not a matter of rescinding it.” she said. “There may be fine-tuning that we do to examples or adding or deleting questions as time goes on and as the commission has more opportunity to consider the specific issues.”

Until then, a FAQ is "a living document" is all the guidance you get while "the commission has more opportunity to consider the specific issues." Seriously? OGEC needs to quit ivory tower pondering and get to work.

Myers said she’s been talking with key stakeholders about the issue, including a leader of the effort to pass the 2023 law, Rep. Nathan Sosa, D-Hillsboro. She said legislative action could be forthcoming as soon as the 2026 legislative session, but that she would prefer receiving advice from the Oregon Law Commission as well, a nonpartisan law reform body that was established in 1997 with the goal of identifying gaps in existing law.

The law, however, does not aim to crack down on public staff aiming to collect background information or data or officials speaking with the media or engaged citizens. Fiskum told members of the body on Friday that lawmakers may act to further clarify the law in the 2027 legislative session, when they’ll have more time than 2026’s 35-day short session. “That reality will carry implications for our administration of this law, as well as for public policy in general,” he said. “Internally, that inability to change things until 2027 means that all of us will have to live with sometimes longer agendas.”

"Inability to change things until 2027"? Because...why?

Finding "there isn't enough clarity" in the public meetings law is a nice first step, but neither the Commision nor its Executive Director seem to understand the absurdity of some of their interpretations, nor the urgency needed in making corrections.

Probably because with this City Council (as opposed to other The Councils), this risks being a two-hour discussion ending in a 6-6 tie on whether the language should instead be drafted to convert the ordinal to cardinal numbers somehow.

Drives me - a guy who will continue to insist that shall is perfectly plain, and is better practice for drafting because it indicates "a duty to" do something and also identifies who has that duty - crazy.

The English is plainer

omfg

Since nevermore a shall to be found anywhere

Unless they make some other changes too, I’m pretty sure the council will go from biweekly meetings that go too long to weekly meetings that go too long.

A quick eyewitness report for your Portland Doom Loop files: the free first Thursday at Portland Art Museum today was positively jam-packed.

The meme girl says, "WHY NOT BOTH?"

Action AND process is the real abundance.

Love that for him

And there are now 🚨Special Meetings🚨 of the Council scheduled for next week.
www.portland.gov/auditor/coun...
www.portland.gov/auditor/coun...

As promised, the cleanup amendment for today's nine-twelfths meeting schedule agenda item was posted yesterday.
www.portland.gov/sites/defaul...

Good catch. This pre-dates my recollection of it. I'm probably thinking of the "Portland Solutions" umbrella that came later.

P.S. Anybody seen that guy lately

It was. Part of Wheeler's pre-transition reorg in anticipation of the transition

Feature, not a bug? As it was sold during the early days of reorg/transition, the new govt specifically created PEMO to bust through the silos of the bureau-owners of trucks and crews to solve street-level problems. The "direct order" from the Mayor (or CityAdmin'r) if not express, might be implied.

Today's $3,750,000 settlement for the family of Manny Clark, who was killed by the Portland Police Bureau in November 2022 will be the largest payment ever for police misconduct in the city.

The previous record was for the 2011 shooting of William Monroe.

www.portlandcopwatch.org/PPR60/shooti...

Exactly

To make a collateral point: advisory bodies, made up of advocates and skeptics alike, need be a necessary *early* step in more govt decision-making processes. If only to force govt to make a coherent explanation of an action, to avoid blind spots, and to help anticipate and understand blowback.

I’m not so sure. The chat isn’t clear about what the alleged communication was or whether he even knew he was part of a quorum when he allegedly communicated. It’s why I said it’s fuzzy and it’s also why the serial communication rule needs to be changed.

Who’s the 7th [serial] communicator? Novick?

There are a couple combinations, which is definitely a complication, but talking about full-council business only, instead of committee business, would seem to be okay. (A blurry line, to be sure.)

And the Dumb Tiebreaker Problem™ plods forward to resolution. By adding resolutions and reports to ties the Mayor can break, a final vote on this ordinance can happen at the next Council meeting. God willing.

Another Burgum order coldcocks solar and wind The Friday order by the Interior secretary on the “capacity density” of solar and wind projects is the latest in a series of restrictive moves by the Trump

The Trump Administration just issued a new order trying to kill solar and wind because they allegedly use too much land. But somehow this new fervor for "capacity density" won't apply to ethanol, which uses 100X as much land as solar per unit of energy.

www.eenews.net/articles/ano...

A cute tuxedo foster kitten relaxes on the kitchen counter she’s not supposed to be on.

Overheard this morning:
Slobbering on the power cord?
NO!
Chomping on the plant?
Also, NO!

First, Marc's testimony was outstanding and everyone should watch it. But this is a really important point.

I think this is the relevant Executive Session, justified as "labor negotiations" or "potential litigation." Seems like a stretch for the retire/rehire issue
www.portland.gov/auditor/coun...

Talking *about* Novick* is not the same as talking *with* Novick, at least as far as the serial communications. Novick, I think, would need to be a knowing participant in the communication(s) under the rule, but it isn't completely clear.

More town halls should be unwound, fwiw