Skip to main content
As the city of Portland approaches a new form of government in 2025, the transition to the city’s new bureau and program structure is well underway. Just two weeks ago, the city released a proposed organizational chart of how the city would function come 2025.
But four neighborhood coalitions that represent a total of 57 neighborhood associations—funded by the city and supported by city staff—are raising an alarm around the uncertain future of their organizations under the proposed city structure.
On Sept. 20, the four district coalitions sent a letter to Mayor Ted Wheeler and Michael Jordan, the city’s chief administrative officer who’s also overseeing the city’s transition, asking that they hold off on approving the organizational chart for another 30 days so that the neighborhood associations can clarify how it would affect them.
Joel Fowlks, vice president of the Eastmoreland Neighborhood Association, says he’s displeased. “We fear that some view the neighborhood system, which has served to connect individual Portlanders to city government now for 50 years, as largely unnecessary now that there will be three elected commissioners for each district,” Fowlks says. “For that reason, we voted to join the district coalitions in calling for the public comment period to be extended, so that we have the time to seek meaningful explanation for this puzzling proposal.”
At issue for the coalitions is that the organizational chart proposes disbanding the Office of Community & Civic Life, which currently oversees neighborhood associations, and placing them under a new program overseen by the mayor’s chief of staff, which would also administer homeless services.
The district coalitions—Central Northeast Neighbors, Northeast Coalition of Neighborhoods, Neighbors West/Northwest, and Southeast Uplift Neighborhood Coalition—say they’re unclear what the implications of this move would be, both in terms of city funding and in who would interact with them.
“We write with great urgency to request that you extend the public comment period for the recently-released draft city structural reorganization,” wrote the four coalitions Sept. 20. “As stakeholders, we are hearing from many in our communities a desire to understand the rationale for placing neighborhoods and district coalitions under the future mayor’s office.”
For decades, neighborhood associations have served as the primary way that Portlanders make their voices heard at City Hall. The associations have enough political clout that their views on policy can shift the City Council. The groups, which often represent the interests of homeowners, have long been viewed as a third rail in Portland politics—former City Commissioner Chloe Eudaly saw her political career upended when she attempted to remake the neighborhood association system in 2019.
So it’s perhaps not surprising that neighborhood associations would object to being shuttled to new oversight under a different bureau without being consulted.
The coalitions asked that the city extend its public comment period for the new organizational chart by 30 days; it’s currently set to close at the end of September. “This is an insufficient amount of time to build understanding and trust in the city’s reorganization process, or to ensure a meaningful opportunity for the public’s voice to be heard,” the districts wrote.
On that same day, the Government Transition Advisory Committee—a citizens group tasked with advising the city on the government transition—voted unanimously to ask the City Council to extend the public comment period for the proposed organizational structure for an additional month. (That advisory group has complained that it’s merely a tool to bolster the optics of the transition for the city, and is not being appropriately consulted by city officials. The City Council has responded that it was never the advisory body’s role to offer input on the new government structure.)
Marianne Fitzgerald, president of the Crestwood Neighborhood Association, wrote in a Sept. 22 letter to the City Council that the group was “deeply disappointed about the lack of public dialogue with the people and organizations directly affected by the proposed city organization chart” and added that neighborhood associations care about more than just homelessness—and are also involved in issues of “land use and transportation projects and plans, public transit improvements, parks and natural areas, watersheds and tree preservation, public safety and affordable housing.”
To date, the city has not responded directly to the district coalitions’ joint letter. However, on Monday the former interim director of Civic Life and a staffer to Commissioner Dan Ryan, T.J. McHugh, sent an email to all neighborhood associations and coalitions, saying that the reorganization as proposed would not eliminate neighborhood funding. It would, however, consolidate the seven district coalitions down to four.
“In order to better align to the new form of government, our District Coalition model will also evolve from 7 coalitions to 4,” McHugh wrote. “The funding to coalitions will remain the same, with the funding moving from 7 current coalitions being reinvested to the 4 new ones.”