I am 100% behind Sarah Michniewicz in this race. She is smart, principled, rational, and hard working. She has been organizing in this community for decades now, on the ground level, and has a firm grasp not only of the issues that Portland faces, but of how city government works so that she can start working on day one. The learning curve can be steep when a new Councilor comes on board, but Sarah is ready to go and will hit the ground running.
In the at-large race, I'm supporting Brandon Mazer because of the knowledge base he will bring to the position. I first met Brandon when we ran against each other for the District 1 seat back in 2015. We became friends during the race and have remained friends. I was impressed by his calm demeanor, his passion for information, his ability to quickly read and analyze complex documents, and quite honestly, his kindness and easy smile. He's a really nice guy!
Honorable Mention: Option C
I like Option B because it corrects a few problems I see in the existing code.
- It requires day space for residents in all new shelters, not just those that are greater than 1/4 mile away from public transit, which is how it's written into the code right now.
- It cleans up the "clear sightlines" requirement so that it doesn't apply to apartment style shelters. Our family shelter is apartment style in that it has multiple private units with closing doors available for families. Domestic violence shelters are often set up with private rooms for guests as well. In those instances, it isn't appropriate or feasible to require clear sight lines. In typical emergency shelters, however, it is important to have clear sightlines to sleeping areas so everyone feels safe, so Option B allows an exception for apartment style shelters but keeps the sightlines requirements for other shelters.
- It makes it clear that all shelters - not just those more than 1/4 mile from METRO service must implement strategies to help clients access public transit.
The other thing B does is to place a limit on the number of emergency shelter beds that could be located in any one area of the city. B limits the total number of emergency shelter beds to 300 in any 1 mile radius. (For several years now there have been over 400 beds located within an 800' radius in Bayside, which doesn't represent equity for anyone, housed or unhoused.) Option B also requires individual shelters to be located at least 1000 feet from one another measured between property lines. There are no such limits on shelter density or location in the code right now, and A, though its proponents talk about smaller *scattered* shelters, does nothing to prevent say, ten 50-bed shelters from all being placed in the same neighborhood.
ADDENDUM: I just received this excellent question from a constituent
So, the Riverside facility would be able to proceed undelayed, but any future proposed facilities would have a 150-bed maximum that could only be increased if the Council declares a shelter capacity emergency.
Does that make sense? If not, please feel free to send more questions.