Seven is a government

Portland's City Council election matters

by Robert Miller

Portland’s City Council election in November is treated as a routine contest about budgets and potholes. It is actually about whether a political caucus becomes a governing majority, and what that majority has already said it intends to do.

Portland’s 12-member council includes a six-member progressive caucus that repeatedly votes together. Six is a tie. This November, all six seats in Districts 3 and 4 are on the ballot, and three caucus incumbents are seeking reelection. If they survive and the caucus gains one more seat, six becomes seven. A disciplined seven can pass ordinary council legislation without persuading anyone outside its own room. Seven is a governing majority.

It matters because the caucus has published its program. Last October, six councilors signed a nationally coordinated pledge organized by Portland Democratic Socialists of America. It commits them to investigate Portland’s alleged economic and infrastructural “complicity” with Israel through city investments and contracts, business incentives, weapons manufacturing, port and logistics activity, and sister-city relationships. Councilor Mitch Green’s official press release says the objective is to “leverage municipal power.”

Portland DSA is equally candid about how its elected members operate. They “coordinate like a party” and “frequently vote as a bloc.” This is not speculation assembled with yarn and a corkboard. It is their marketing copy.

This is not about whether Israel may be criticized. Councilors and residents have every right to their views. The narrower question is whether Portland’s investments, contracts, incentives and regulatory relationships should become instruments of nationally coordinated foreign-policy activism. That is a governance question, not a Middle East question.

The machinery is already moving. In December, the council amended and adopted Resolution 37723, urging the administration to assist council offices in developing options for an “Ethical Investment Policy.” It would screen city investments for connections to genocide, war crimes and human-rights abuses. Options are due for public presentation by Aug. 31.

The resolution had broad support and does not mention Israel. Screening investments is not inherently illegitimate. Governments have an interest in avoiding investments that finance atrocities. But the resolution contains no definitions for the proposed screen. Complicit by what standard, decided by whom and appealable to what authority?

This is no longer theoretical. Activists have pressed the city to determine whether Portland-based Sightline Intelligence receives city resources, tax breaks, contracts or investments because of its reported connection to an Israeli defense supplier. Councilors Angelita Morillo and Tiffany Koyama Lane say the company represents exactly the activity contemplated by the pledge. The question is what standards will govern that power.

Why should we care? Businesses depend on government for contracts, infrastructure, economic-development incentives, regulatory approvals and predictable rules. The DSA pledge proposes asking port authorities and logistics companies to certify whether they transport weapons or cargo connected to Israel. Certification is not my invention. It is theirs.

The damage may never arrive through a dramatic council vote. A manufacturer, lender or contractor sees a city where “complicity” is undefined, and ordinary business relationships may trigger investigation. The uncertainty is not worth the headache, so the deal routes around Portland. The permit is pursued elsewhere. The expansion goes to another city. Markets price political uncertainty long before courts settle it.

My objection is not partisan. Arkansas requires state contractors to certify they are not boycotting Israel. That is compliance theater aimed in the opposite direction. Governments should not impose Middle East loyalty tests on people seeking public business, whichever side writes the test.

Before Aug. 31, the council should tell Portland what definitions the policy will use, who decides, what protects a business or fund wrongly included and where an investigation ends. Every candidate in Districts 3 and 4 should also be asked: Do you support using Portland’s municipal power to conduct foreign policy?

Voters deserve the answer before November. Seven is not a tie. Seven is a governing majority.

Robert Miller is a Portland-based investor and gaming-industry executive. He writes The Center Held on Substack.