What does Sam Adams think he’s doing?

Later this month, Portland City Council will probably pass a $464 million tax package to fill potholes, create new bike routes and modernize traffic signals. The plan will cost the average Portland household $800—and the average business $15,000—over the next 15 years.

And its author is Sam Adams.

Who is running for mayor.

Let’s rewind this: Adams wants to be Portland’s next mayor. At the same time, he is asking a public that’s increasingly worried about making the nut to pay more in taxes.

So, is Adams courageous? Or crazy?

“This is not the issue you run for mayor on,” says the conventional wisdom, as channeled by state Sen. Rick Metsger, a Democrat who represents Welches and chairs the Senate Transportation Committee.

Ever since the rise of Ronald Reagan (and his trouncing in 1984 of Democratic opponent Walter Mondale), politicians have made a simple calculation: If you’re going to raise taxes, it’s better to lie about it, as the first George Bush did with his “read my lips: no new taxes” campaign pledge in 1988.

Can a candidate today run on raising taxes, even on Democratic turf?

“No. No, no, no, no. No taxes. No increases of government funding of any kind,” says Chris Crotty, a political consultant in San Diego, which leans Democratic within the city limits. Running on a tax increase, Crotty says, is “political suicide.”

But if you concluded Adams lacks political savvy, you’d be wrong. Or at least you’d be guilty of misunderstanding this curious petri dish we call home. Because Portland is different.

To understand what makes Portland different, first know this: Around the country, the word of the year is “change.” Though it’s already a worn-out mantra in the presidential race, the desire for change is real. In recent

months, survey after survey shows that Americans have lost faith in government—at all levels.

Roughly 70 percent report being dissatisfied or worried about the direction of the country. It’s not just President George W. Bush, whose approval ratings hover around 30 percent, who troubles the public. The Democratic Congress polls as low or lower.

The war in Iraq weighs especially heavy. A Jan. 4 poll by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press showed people felt the war was the most important news story of the year, by far. This is consistent with the findings of other recent surveys, such as the November Gallup poll in which people listed their top concerns as:

1. Iraq (24 percent)
2. The economy (14 percent)
3. Health care (12 percent)
4. Poor leadership (11 percent)
5. Fuel prices (7 percent)
6. Immigration (7 percent)

At the local level, too, Americans outside Portland are looking for change, and they’re driven by very specific issues.

In Orlando, Fla., which picks a new mayor Jan. 29, that issue is crime. The previous two years set records for the number of murders there.

In many states and cities, candidates are proposing to eliminate all property and income taxes, while expanding the sales tax.

Indianapolis elected a new Republican mayor last year, based on ”voter anger about rising taxes and crime,” according to The Indianapolis Star .

Earlier this month, a new mayor took over Philadelphia, successfully running on a campaign of ethics reform. His first official act, according to The Philadelphia Inquirer , was to declare a “crime emergency.”

But in Portland, things really do look different. While Portlanders are just as absorbed as anyone by national politics, that’s not the case when it comes to local politics.

What is the defining local issue for Portland in 2008?

“Beats the hell out of me,” says Lisa Grove, a local Democratic pollster and consultant.

It hasn’t always been this way.

In the early 1970s, the Mount Hood Freeway was the big issue. Successful opposition to the freeway helped carry Neil Goldschmidt into the mayor’s office in 1973.

Up until about a decade ago, crime was on everybody’s mind. Mayor Bud Clark ran for reelection with a “Safer City” plan in 1988, having fired two police chiefs in his first term. (Under Clark, Portland went through six police chiefs in eight years.)

More recently, voters have been motivated by the issue of education.

In 2000, a recently formed group called the “Education Crisis Team” was staging protests and making headlines. The victorious candidates in all city and Multnomah County races had emphasized education in their Voters’ Pamphlet platforms.

But for the past few years, Portland has been somewhat issueless.

Which is not to say that there are not serious issues confronting this city:

• Housing: Forget what the “experts” say about nationwide comparisons. It’s too damn expensive here.
• The eroding manufacturing base.
• A growing black, Asian and Hispanic population that is underrepresented in government.
• The challenge of planning for the expected 1 million newcomers to the Portland area over the next two decades.
• The humiliation of being out-weirded by Seattle when it named its new streetcar the SLUT.
• The mushrooming industry of quirky singer-songwriters.

Portlanders are more satisfied with the City Council than they were three decades ago—but also more ignorant about how it works. Here are their views then and now: Source: The Oregonian, Riley Research Associates

No pants, no worries: Fifty people had time to ride the MAX without pants last Saturday. Wonder what their top city issue is. Image: cameronbrowne.com

In part, we’re fine and mellow because we haven’t really felt the pinch of recession. Even though a 2007 report by the Northwest Federation of Community Organizations shows the cost of living in Oregon is rising nearly twice as fast as the median wage, that gap is wider in Washington, Idaho and Montana. Also, the Portland area, unlike many cities, continued to add jobs last year—albeit at the slow rate of 1.3 percent.

“Generally speaking, when you have a good economy, you don’t have a dominant issue—unless something pops up,” says Moore, the pollster.

In part, too there is a general sense of satisfaction with the city government.

Only about 20 percent of Portlanders who live within city limits hold negative views about the city’s elected leaders, according to a Riley Research poll released in June 2007. Nearly a third are neutral, ambivalent or clueless.

“I don’t know that I have any particular dissatisfaction” with City Hall, the soft-spoken Dozono said, kicking off his campaign. “I think we’re talking about the future here.”

“I wouldn’t say that we have a satisfied electorate per se, in the sense that they’re complacent or status-quo driven, but I think that over the past few years, Portland voters have begun to settle a little bit about who they are and how they view their city,” says influential Portland political consultant Mark Wiener, who supports Adams.

Portland has “settled” politically because many of the people who might’ve challenged the happathetic status quo moved out of the city instead.

“Around the country, people are sort of moving to their respective corners. The red areas are getting redder, and the blue areas are getting bluer,” says Wiener. “That leads not necessarily to homogeneity, but certainly to a more harmonious tone that emanates from the populace.”

As the inner city grows more expensive and the rental market moves eastward, it brings the progressive vote along with it. At the same time, the suburbs and exurbs—where it’s cheaper to buy a starter home or open a business—are becoming more conservative.

In 1988, 47 percent of Multnomah County voted for George “No New Taxes” Bush. At that time, the average sale price of a single-family home in the Portland area was $135,000, in today’s dollars.

In 2004, only 29 percent voted for George “War on Terror” Bush. The average cost of a home had nearly doubled.

The few remaining Multnomah County precincts where Republicans can pull slim majorities now hug 182nd Avenue on the east side. That rough political dividing line in East Portland was once much closer in, roughly along 52nd Avenue, say pollsters, consultants and demographers.

In the past four years, parts of outer Southeast Portland, Gresham and Troutdale have moved solidly into the Democratic fold. In Oregon’s 49th House District, represented by Republican Karen Minnis, the Democratic Party’s voter registration advantage has steadily increased to 2,500 people—a 13 percent gain in the past six years.

African-Americans and other racial minorities who live in Portland, which is about two-thirds white, are increasing in number, but they are also moving farther out. Minorities tend to vote at lower rates than whites, and also lean Democratic. But they have a different set of concerns than the more affluent whites who constitute the Portland majority—concerns to which an all-white City Council may be less responsive.

That same lack of openness applies to local government’s lack of ideological diversity.

Tim Nashif, a conservative political consultant and native Portlander, says City Hall has done a pretty good job over the years, but the liberal consensus on the council has resulted in a kind of groupthink that can be dangerous.

“I don’t think that everything a liberal has to offer should be flushed down the toilet. But they think that everything a conservative says has no value,” Nashif adds. The smart thing, he says, would be to “pull in some people that you don’t like, but that you respect.”

Not likely. As long as most Portlanders are happy with what they’ve got in the bank, the wave of change sweeping the country will probably feel more like a gentle jet of Jacuzzi bubbles by the time it hits City Hall this May.

“We’ve become stagnant,” says North Portland businessman Harold Williams, who serves on the board of Portland Community College and is a member of the Coalition of Black Men.

It’s a bad time for complacency. The City Council that takes office in 2009 will update the so-called “Portland Plan” for the first time in a generation. It will set the direction on everything from land use to taxes to environmental regulation for the next 25 years.

“Portlanders need to know that this is not just another municipal election,” says Sam Adams. “There are some hidden vulnerabilities in this city that need to be addressed.”

“When I was on the council, we thought that if we weren’t moving forward with the city, we were probably moving backward,” says Mike Lindberg, who served on City Council from 1979 to 1997. “Although there’s been a lot of success [in Portland over the years], I can’t say you should be in a mode of saying, ‘Well, things are really fine now.’”

“In terms of job creation and job retention, you always have to be moving ahead,” Lindberg says. Otherwise, Portland risks losing its appeal to families and becoming “a city of empty-nesters and the young.”

Or, even worse, “a shopping mall for smug, liberal, retired baby boomers who have now chosen an urban center for all of the attractions of the suburbs where they previously lived,” as Eddie Cushman, a 40-year-old Pearl District resident, puts it. “It’s no coincidence you have so many retirees moving here and so few minorities.”

On Jan. 18 at Jefferson High School, a place that has become symbolic of the Portlanders who have been left out of the party, Mayor Tom Potter will deliver his last State of the City speech. We know Potter will “listen,” but we don’t know what he will say.

An honest appraisal would find the State of the City is, like, you know, whatever.

They got problems. We asked City Hall candidates for their quick takes on the issues confronting Portland.

Candidates for Mayor

KYLE BURRIS: “The rampant gentrification, perpetuated by yuppie scum, and City Hall. The corruption of our culture, perpetuated by the goddamn hipsters.”

VLADISLAV DAVIDZON: “The biggest issue facing our city is that our media believes that we can state the issues in 20 words or less.”

JAMES LEE: “I’ve observed the council for 35 years. This is the most inept lot ever. All five must go.”

Candidates for City Council

[Randy Leonard’s seat]

REV. JERRY EDWARD KILL: Police are “the No. 1 problem in Portland.... They seem to have this post-9/11 attitude of, ‘We’re the boss.’”

LEONARD: “For me, this next year is going to be about working to institutionalize and explaining why [Project 57, an anti-recidivism program] is effective.”

MARTHA PEREZ: “Jobs, health care, infrastructure, growth, transportation, education, homelessness, hunger, neighborhood relationships with police efforts, and related topics.”

[Erik Sten’s seat]

NICK FISH: “Stop predatory lending practices, hold PDC accountable for 30 percent set-aside for housing, link families with schools and end homelessness.”

BRENDAN FINN: “Continuing our momentum as the most unique and progressive city in the nation while maintaining affordability and a sustainable environment.”

ED GARREN: “Economic justice and changing demographics as the city grows and becomes more dense. Maintaining livability for all Portlanders.”

JIM MIDDAUGH: “Keeping Portland a great city means keeping our schools vibrant, our environment healthy and our city affordable. Those are my priorities.”

NICK POPENUK: “Our city government lacks common sense. We need to focus on basic services, eliminate pet projects, and protect Portland taxpayers.”

HAROLD WILLIAMS two: “Having access to city services. Portland has phenomenal services, but people don’t know how to access them.”

[Sam Adams’ seat]

JEFFREY BISSONNETTE: “The main issue we must address is creating family-wage jobs and opportunities for Portlanders to start and sustain locally owned businesses.”

JOHN BRANAM: “The growing number of our friends and neighbors who are struggling to make ends meet is Portland’s most pressing problem.”

AMANDA FRITZ: “Our priorities: stable funding for basic services. Citywide affordable housing. Strong communities. Sustainability. Access to health care. Accountable, transparent leadership.”

CHARLES LEWIS: “I will focus on keeping Portland affordable, instilling accountability in government, and using creative problem-solving to address community concerns.”

CHRIS SMITH: “Now: income disparity. Very soon: Peak Oil and global warming. Portland can show the country and world what to do.”

HOWARD WEINER: “Educational opportunities that train our children for living-wage jobs and supporting our local businesses both small and large.”