Skip to main content
When Portland tavern owner Bud Clark challenged then-Mayor Frank Ivancie in 1984, few took his candidacy seriously. But this newspaper endorsed him. WW’s endorsement in the May primary floated a hope that Clark could force Ivancie into a runoff in November. Instead, Clark won outright in May.
Here’s what our editorial board wrote in the May 7, 1984, issue.
Mayor
Bud Clark
No current Portland-area race concerns, disappoints and generally dismays us more than the one for the mayor’s position.
It is no secret to readers of Willamette Week that we consider Mayor Frank Ivancie an ineffective leader. He disdains the planning process, is arrogant toward those who seek to contribute to the political process, and in four years has done little to lead Portland into the future. Many of the downtown projects that are now under way or have recently been completed have been feasible either over the objections of the mayor (Pioneer Courthouse Square) or with only his tepid support (the Performing Arts Center). Ivancie’s record has been distinguished more by the failure of some of his pet schemes — notably the Produce Row development plan, which never got off the ground, and his much vaunted War on Crime, which the city attorney deemed both redundant and unconstitutional.
To give him his due, Ivancie has not been an utter failure: his donation of the old Water Bureau building to Portland State University for a computer center. and his piloting of the Bull Run water-supply project are to be lauded. Even his highly touted trips to the Pacific Rim are probably justifiable.
But Ivancie is an impatient man who thrives on the immediate act in search of instantaneous gain. His innovative but goofy scheme to bottle and market Bull Run water is a telling metaphor for his role: it points to his fondness for the gimmick and his distaste for any kind of longterm agenda that focuses on the city’s strengths and its drawing power as one of this country’s most attractive cities. And although it’s clear that he loves his job, that hardly means he should retain it.
However, we have reservations about his challengers. Of the four, two cannot be regarded as serious. They are Norman Berberick. a self-proclaimed “genius” in the engineering world, and Socialist candidate Joe Kear. Stan Kahn, a thoughtful candidate with a strong commitment to recycling and neighborhood development, has no political experience. The fourth challenger, Bud Clark, far surpasses the others in terms of his organized political campaign and qualifications.
Clark is an experienced businessman and a longtime civic activist whose campaign has clearly caught the imagination of many Portlanders. But, like Ivancie, he seems to lack a defined vision for the city in which he grew up. It’s one thing to be concerned about the incumbent’s leadership and angered by it, but it’s another to offer some solid alternatives. Clark’s goals are a moving target, shifting among whimsical solutions to serious problems. However, we don’t expect a first-time candidate to have all the answers and we admire Clark’s decision to challenge Ivancie. particularly when no other member of the city’s sizable progressive community would step forward to the task.
What, then, is our advice to voters? We suggest that they vote for Clark. If Ivancie fails to get 51 per cent of the vote, the two leading contenders will face a runoff in the November election. The race would be good for the citizens of Portland, and it would be good for Ivancie, as he would be forced to engage his opponent seriously in a running debate about the issues crucial to this city. It would also be good for Clark, in that it would give him the time to develop his ideas more thoroughly and deliver them with the enthusiasm and commitment that have distinguished his years as a neighborhood activist.
In addition, a vote for Clark would send a powerful message to Ivancie. It might communicate to him that a sizable minority of Portlanders are sufficiently concerned about the mayor, both in terms of his style and his substance, as to be unwilling to support him in a campaign he already considers a foregone conclusion. That in itself is enough reason to support Bud Clark.