Just want to note, this will be the first time in a year Mitch Green has shown his face at any Armory public meeting. 200+ Pearl District residents have shown up multiple times to discuss the continued erosion of our neighborhood and public safety and he was notably missing from all these events, while Zimmerman and Clark have been doing the work. He doesn’t represent our best interests, only his own. Let’s get rid of him in November. Rank Eli, Zimmerman, and Clark!
This is my suggestion for the first questions directed at Green: Mitch, several major public meetings have been held at the Armory about public safety and conditions in the Pearl District, and many neighborhood residents have repeatedly participated. You were noticeably absent from those meetings, while other District 4 candidates have been showing up and engaging with residents.
Why did you choose not to attend those earlier meetings, and what would you say to Pearl District residents who question whether neighborhood concerns have been a priority for you?
Actually Green did show up a year ago for the first of those big Armory meetings. That was the one in which Mayor Wilson was challenged for his decision to open the Northrup Street Shelter. Green, Clark and Zimmerman talked on a brief panel after Wilson's speech.
Ok, I stand corrected and did modify my original comment. However, we’ve had at least 3-4 more since then and he’s been a no show since the shelters opened and the real fallout began. He appears to be MIA for the neighborhood and someone needs to ask him what exactly he’s done to help mitigate our overwhelming issues around homelessness and crime in NW Portland. If others are ok with him going silent for a year on these topics and blowing off large community meetings while he finds time to pursue things like a foi gras ban, they can vote for him I guess. I won’t be.
This attack will just help re-elect Green. His supporters--enough to produce victory on the 25-percent rank choice ballot--are embarrassment-proof. They like what he says.
They are going to vote for him regardless of whatever stupid things he does - that is clear. It’s not an attack to point out that he hasn’t shown up for the neighborhood. This is a reminder for all those Portland “neutrals” who don’t pay attention to what is going on and then are surprised when their car gets broken into twice in a month or they can’t walk their kid to school without seeing people openly doing drugs.
Clark and Zimmerman were big supporters of Mayor Wilson's Pearl shelter, over the protests of local neighbors. Now that a year has passed and that shelter has closed, I want to know if they still support the Mayor's plan.
Is there some reason you wouldn’t ask Green the same question? As I remember, none of them were big supporters of the shelter but did nothing ultimately to stop it. At least Zimmerman and Clark vocally spoke out against its mismanagement once it opened and argued for the eventual closure.
And these are the only people on the ballot? These are the only people who have any ideas about the city? Is there anything to learn about the incumbents we don't already know? Is just one challenger allowed--and why should he bear the weight of questioning the incumbents? \
If you want to know what's wrong with the current government, charter, and politics, look no further.
I look forward to this event!
Thank you for organizing this.
Just want to note, this will be the first time in a year Mitch Green has shown his face at any Armory public meeting. 200+ Pearl District residents have shown up multiple times to discuss the continued erosion of our neighborhood and public safety and he was notably missing from all these events, while Zimmerman and Clark have been doing the work. He doesn’t represent our best interests, only his own. Let’s get rid of him in November. Rank Eli, Zimmerman, and Clark!
This is my suggestion for the first questions directed at Green: Mitch, several major public meetings have been held at the Armory about public safety and conditions in the Pearl District, and many neighborhood residents have repeatedly participated. You were noticeably absent from those meetings, while other District 4 candidates have been showing up and engaging with residents.
Why did you choose not to attend those earlier meetings, and what would you say to Pearl District residents who question whether neighborhood concerns have been a priority for you?
Actually Green did show up a year ago for the first of those big Armory meetings. That was the one in which Mayor Wilson was challenged for his decision to open the Northrup Street Shelter. Green, Clark and Zimmerman talked on a brief panel after Wilson's speech.
Ok, I stand corrected and did modify my original comment. However, we’ve had at least 3-4 more since then and he’s been a no show since the shelters opened and the real fallout began. He appears to be MIA for the neighborhood and someone needs to ask him what exactly he’s done to help mitigate our overwhelming issues around homelessness and crime in NW Portland. If others are ok with him going silent for a year on these topics and blowing off large community meetings while he finds time to pursue things like a foi gras ban, they can vote for him I guess. I won’t be.
This attack will just help re-elect Green. His supporters--enough to produce victory on the 25-percent rank choice ballot--are embarrassment-proof. They like what he says.
They are going to vote for him regardless of whatever stupid things he does - that is clear. It’s not an attack to point out that he hasn’t shown up for the neighborhood. This is a reminder for all those Portland “neutrals” who don’t pay attention to what is going on and then are surprised when their car gets broken into twice in a month or they can’t walk their kid to school without seeing people openly doing drugs.
Hooray! (Please, no Yes/No lightning rounds. Those reduce complex issues to oversimplified bullet points.)
Clark and Zimmerman were big supporters of Mayor Wilson's Pearl shelter, over the protests of local neighbors. Now that a year has passed and that shelter has closed, I want to know if they still support the Mayor's plan.
Is there some reason you wouldn’t ask Green the same question? As I remember, none of them were big supporters of the shelter but did nothing ultimately to stop it. At least Zimmerman and Clark vocally spoke out against its mismanagement once it opened and argued for the eventual closure.
And these are the only people on the ballot? These are the only people who have any ideas about the city? Is there anything to learn about the incumbents we don't already know? Is just one challenger allowed--and why should he bear the weight of questioning the incumbents? \
If you want to know what's wrong with the current government, charter, and politics, look no further.
My questions:
How will you measure the success of the current charter in preparation for the next charter review?
Why have you not applied the outreach recommendations from the Government Transition Advisory Committee?
If you had job descriptions, would they depict you as addressing citywide issues, district-wide issues, or constituent problems?
How do you feel our neighborhood coalition boundaries have worked out? Any thoughts of subdividing them?
Why is the city's website content available only in English?