Metro Appointment Race Gets Interesting

As former Governor Barbara Roberts adds her name at the last minute to the least of folks seeking to replace Council Robert Liberty. I wonder what her CRC stance is?

The final list (the cutoff was at 5pm today):

  • Martha Dibblee, a retired health physicist and consultant who has served on the Energy Facility Siting Council and the board of the Climate Trust.
  • Kenneth Heggem, a sales representative with Columbia Northwest Heating and board member of the Woodstock Neighborhood Association.
  • Jonathan Levine, a former project manager with the University of Western States.
  • Walt Nichols, a bookkeeper with Watson Plumbing Co. and chair of the Mt. Scott-Arleta Neighborhood Association. Nichols was an unsuccessful candidate for Portland City Council in 2010.
  • Alesia Reese, a clerk with the U.S. Postal Service and member of the Parkrose School District board. She is also chair of the Woodland Park Neighborhood Association and the East Portland Parks Coalition.
  • Barbara Roberts, former Oregon Governor.
  • Bob Shiprack, a labor relations consultant for Pac/West Communications and a former executive secretary of the Oregon State Building Trades Council. He served six terms in the Oregon House of Representatives from 1983 to 1995.
  • Bob Stacey, a consultant and former executive director of 1000 Friends of Oregon. He also served as chief of staff to Congressman Earl Blumenauer and as executive director of policy and planning for TriMet. Stacey was an unsuccessful candidate for Metro Council President in 2010.

10 responses to “Metro Appointment Race Gets Interesting”

  1. Wow, didn’t see that coming! Did Roberts endorse either Hughes or Stacey during the race last fall? (I’m guessing neither).

    Also, can someone remind me what the appointment process is? The other four councilors choose, correct?

    Stacey, as the clear choice until this point, has got to be worried about his chances with a former Governor in the ring. Seems pretty awkward for whoever has to choose… how easy is it to snub a Governor?

    I wonder what Liberty thinks of this as he exits.

  2. I think that District 6 residents are lucky to have people of the caliber of Robert Liberty and Bob Stacey willing to serve on the Metro Council.

    I think that it would be a slap in the face to the voters of that district if the other Councilors were to appoint anyone other than Bob Stacey. Given that the voters of District 6 unseated Rod Monroe in favor of Liberty, and given Stacey’s vote count in the last election, I think their policy preferences are clear.

    Having known Bob Stacey for over 40 years, I know that he will show the same fiscal caution that Liberty did (although few gave Liberty credit for it). Bob was born in Oregon, graduated from Park Rose High School; his father was a career Army Sargeant. He is sincere about public service.

    Given Bob Stacey’s background, he would be a great contributor to the Metro Council, beholden to no-one, easily accessible, and able to think logically and independently. Tom Hughes likely understands that, which is why I expect him to vote for Bob Stacey.

    I hope Rex Burkholder, who is my Councilor, also understands that Bob will be his most effective ally in achieving his goals of promoting sustainability and livability in the region.

    (note: Barbara Roberts did endorse Bob Stacey for Metro President.)

  3. Bob Stacey has withdrawn his name from consideration for the Metro Council vacancy, plans to run for the Council in 2012. According to Stacey, none of the candidates who applied had sufficient support among existing councilors to win the appointment, and apparently ex-governor Barbara Roberts (Stacey’s old boss) was recruited to the post as a compromise.

    One wonders how his opponents (Rex and Tom) in the president’s race were prepared to vote? Stacey’s campaign got a bit down and dirty back in October–Hughes declined to respond in kind, but was clearly annoyed.

  4. I am curious about how EngineerScotty believes Stacey’s campaign “got a bit down and dirty” in October?

    I know that “The Oregonian,” hiding behind the seemingly neutral name of “Politifact Oregon,” seemed upset that Stacey said that Hughes had been a lobbyist for developers to bring land into the urban growth boundary, a fact that Hughes freely admitted to in their joint endorsement interview with Willamette Week.

    Did Stacey make any derogatory claims that were not based in fact?

  5. I should preface my remarks here that I voted for Stacey, not Hughes.

    At any rate, the initial Politifact is a nonpartisan fact-checking organization run by the St. Petersburg Times; “Politifact Oregon” is a joint venture between Politifact and The Oregonian. All of this is out in the open for anyone who cares to go look, so it’s not as though the O is hiding anything.

    I let their analysis of a Stacey campaign ad (which they rated “False”) speak for itself.

  6. I hope Engineer Scotty will forgive me for beating a dead horse, but I am glad to see his link to the Oregonian’s “analysis” which I see as opinion cloaked under the mantle of the word “fact.” Had this been published on their opinion page, I would not have considered it unethical.

    They quote from a Stacey ad, confirm the truth of the entire quote, then declare the ad “false” on their “truth-o-meter.” This rating is apparently based not on what Stacey or Hughes did in the past, but on what Stacey’s ad claimed Hughes is likely to do in the future based on his record.

    In a campaign in which Hughes repeatedly stated that his position on the urban growth boundary was similar to Stacey’s, I would suggest that it is necessary to go to their records in order to differentiate between the two.

    Are we required to accept each candidate’s claims at face value, because drawing a reasonable inference from their records is labeled “getting down and dirty?”

    A useful exercise would be to ask yourself this: Given that Tom Hughes worked as a paid lobbyist for Maletis Brothers to bring their French Prairie land into the urban growth boundary, and given that Tom Hughes claimed on the campaign trail that he supports a “tight” urban growth boundary, how would you conduct a campaign, if you were his opponent with a strong actual record of protecting the urban growth boundary?

    If someone has an effective approach to use under these circumstances, I hope you share it with us, because other candidates will, no doubt, see how effective Hughes’s approach was, and will emulate his “carve out the middle” approach. Hughes has already shown that he is a tough player, by his refusal to vote for Stacey. I expect him to push hard for the CRC, and work quietly to bring more Washington County land into the Urban Reserves, and those of us who have a different agenda need to discover an effective counter approach.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *