Only a masochist--or the self-interested--should go anywhere near any of these dreary sessions. Better you should read the monthly auditor's accounts of lobbying...gee, Teacher Tiffany got to go on a junket to DC paid for by the Japanese consulate. And the city's leading builder of "affordable" housing, Related NW, spent $20,000 in one month kanoodling with various people who can give them fat contracts. And the list of five-figure lobbying goes on and on..lots of "listening" there.
As for the mopes in the audience...better you should spend the evening talking to your dog.
Thanks for the summary of the Budget Listening meeting for D4. I can't help but wonder if the sparse attendance wasn't a reflection of the fact that many 'random citizens' may simply feel like their voices aren't heard by some of the Council Members whose minds are already made up on what is worth keeping and what should be cut in the new budget.
Mayor Wilson's recent letter to constituents calls out how so many Council discussions are being dominated by well organized/vocal groups which are making it challenging if not impossible for some to get their points across.
From Wilson's letter:
Here’s the problem. The “pros” have gotten very good at gaming the public testimony system. They know just when to sign up to testify, take up as many slots as they can, push rigged constituent surveys, and coordinate on messaging. It’s not very democratic to drown out, shout down, or intimidate everyday Portlanders who are just there to get local government to listen.
While these groups deserve credit for their organizing, I don't know that they accurately represent the majority of constituents. I suspect we'll find that out in the November elections for Districts 3 and 4.
The notification of the event did not indicate it was to ask for constituent input, but rather a “presentation.” After that, I felt I had a pretty good idea of what the event would entail. Your reporting confirmed my expectations.
I think there is a real sense of “budget fatigue” among many of us who have spent years advocating, testifying, and trying to bring common sense to funding decisions that repeatedly target shelter services, outreach, and camp abatement. Every year it feels like the same conversation: cuts, cuts, cuts.
For the past 4+ years, I have helped lead a mostly privately funded shelter and recovery organization here in Portland. In fact, this past year was the very first time we accepted public funding from the City of Portland to help operate our 80-bed recovery-focused shelter on Grand Avenue.
That funding began in November 2025 and has truly been a blessing over the last six months. It allowed us to redirect privately raised dollars into our long-term residential recovery programs, programs that now help transform the lives of more than 165 men and women each year. Our shelter has always been designed as part of a broader continuum of care, helping connect people from the streets into stability, recovery, workforce development, and long-term life change.
We recently learned that the shelter funding will be cut at the end of June, which will ultimately lead to the closure of the Grand Avenue shelter after 28 years of operation.
While the news is disappointing, it also reinforces a difficult reality: public funding is often unpredictable and unreliable. It becomes nearly impossible to maintain a healthy safety net and true continuum of care when organizations cannot count on stable support from year to year.
Lesson learned on my part: never build critical services entirely dependent on public dollars.
At this point, showing up to another budget listening session honestly feels less productive than spending that same time raising private support and showcasing the measurable impact of programs that are actually changing lives.
I truly pray for the day when my job is no longer needed. That should be the goal of every homeless services provider, to help people move beyond homelessness permanently. Otherwise, we risk creating revolving doors that consume endless resources without producing lasting transformation.
Wow. Who knew about this?
I didn’t and would have gone if I had. I only knew about the ones mid-May. Where was this advertised?
It was posted on the city's social media and website and on the D4 coalition calendar, but those avenues have limited reach.
Only a masochist--or the self-interested--should go anywhere near any of these dreary sessions. Better you should read the monthly auditor's accounts of lobbying...gee, Teacher Tiffany got to go on a junket to DC paid for by the Japanese consulate. And the city's leading builder of "affordable" housing, Related NW, spent $20,000 in one month kanoodling with various people who can give them fat contracts. And the list of five-figure lobbying goes on and on..lots of "listening" there.
As for the mopes in the audience...better you should spend the evening talking to your dog.
Thanks for the summary of the Budget Listening meeting for D4. I can't help but wonder if the sparse attendance wasn't a reflection of the fact that many 'random citizens' may simply feel like their voices aren't heard by some of the Council Members whose minds are already made up on what is worth keeping and what should be cut in the new budget.
Mayor Wilson's recent letter to constituents calls out how so many Council discussions are being dominated by well organized/vocal groups which are making it challenging if not impossible for some to get their points across.
From Wilson's letter:
Here’s the problem. The “pros” have gotten very good at gaming the public testimony system. They know just when to sign up to testify, take up as many slots as they can, push rigged constituent surveys, and coordinate on messaging. It’s not very democratic to drown out, shout down, or intimidate everyday Portlanders who are just there to get local government to listen.
While these groups deserve credit for their organizing, I don't know that they accurately represent the majority of constituents. I suspect we'll find that out in the November elections for Districts 3 and 4.
We’ll have to mention this to Eric Zimmerman tomorrow night.
The notification of the event did not indicate it was to ask for constituent input, but rather a “presentation.” After that, I felt I had a pretty good idea of what the event would entail. Your reporting confirmed my expectations.
I think there is a real sense of “budget fatigue” among many of us who have spent years advocating, testifying, and trying to bring common sense to funding decisions that repeatedly target shelter services, outreach, and camp abatement. Every year it feels like the same conversation: cuts, cuts, cuts.
For the past 4+ years, I have helped lead a mostly privately funded shelter and recovery organization here in Portland. In fact, this past year was the very first time we accepted public funding from the City of Portland to help operate our 80-bed recovery-focused shelter on Grand Avenue.
That funding began in November 2025 and has truly been a blessing over the last six months. It allowed us to redirect privately raised dollars into our long-term residential recovery programs, programs that now help transform the lives of more than 165 men and women each year. Our shelter has always been designed as part of a broader continuum of care, helping connect people from the streets into stability, recovery, workforce development, and long-term life change.
We recently learned that the shelter funding will be cut at the end of June, which will ultimately lead to the closure of the Grand Avenue shelter after 28 years of operation.
While the news is disappointing, it also reinforces a difficult reality: public funding is often unpredictable and unreliable. It becomes nearly impossible to maintain a healthy safety net and true continuum of care when organizations cannot count on stable support from year to year.
Lesson learned on my part: never build critical services entirely dependent on public dollars.
At this point, showing up to another budget listening session honestly feels less productive than spending that same time raising private support and showcasing the measurable impact of programs that are actually changing lives.
I truly pray for the day when my job is no longer needed. That should be the goal of every homeless services provider, to help people move beyond homelessness permanently. Otherwise, we risk creating revolving doors that consume endless resources without producing lasting transformation.