create.communicate.connect

Neighborhood Notes

Click on one of the quadrants above to locate your own neighborhood.
...our website for information.
...to receive our newsletter.

news...

June 20,2008

Saltzman asks for delay to urban renewal vote on David Douglas school

by shooter

It looks like Commissioner Saltzman blinked and for the right reason. Why the City Council would want to embroil any solution to David Douglas' overcrowding issue in a legal battle is beyond me. It would be a huge waste of time and money.

Saltzman's recommendation that PDC examine if the school property could be added to the Lents URA via a contiguous boundary change makes much more sense and at first glance appears to be legal. David Douglas could get its much-needed elementary school and Urban Renewal would stay true to its original intent.

Let's hope the rest of the City Council comes to its senses.

From The Oregonian:

Portland City Commissioner Dan Saltzman on Friday asked his colleagues to delay a crucial but controversial vote next week on a plan to spend money set aside for downtown redevelopment on a new elementary school for outer Southeast Portland.

In a letter, Saltzman asked his fellow commissioners and Mayor Tom Potter for a six week delay in the vote that is scheduled for Wednesday in order to amend the proposal.

The move is the first sign that the council's so-far unwavering support for the idea may be headed for trouble. But it could also signal a compromise that might quiet opponents of the plan who have threatened a lawsuit to stop it.

After hearing testimony on the subject earlier in the week, Saltzman said his support for the original idea waned because of the threat of a drawn-out court battle.

Read the full story.

posted at 03:54 PM 7 comments
categories: land use+planning
tags: urban renewal
Comments:
Psymonetta Isnoful - June 21, 2008 02:15 PM
From an outside perspective, adding the David Douglas parcel into the Lents URA makes sense. But, if you were involved in the initial study and know the goals of the URA plan, using Lents resources to build a 19 million dollar school in Pleasant Valley is completely counter-intuitive. It takes focus away from the real urban renewal that needs to happen in the commercial areas around SE Foster and 92nd.
shooter - June 21, 2008 02:31 PM
Psymonetta, I understand the outsider perspective issue. It’s the same in the River District where people outside of the district believe using the money to build a school that is 15 miles away is justifiable. Those living in the River District disagree because the primary goal of a URA is to increase property tax revenue and create jobs. A school half way across the city doesn’t really contribute to that under the URA concept. Using URA dollars in this way seems to be the City Council’s way to apply a band aid to much bigger problem. The needs of David Douglas and Portland Public Schools are real. The City Council needs to work on real solutions, not band aids.
Psymonetta Isnoful - June 21, 2008 06:32 PM
Shooter, I totally agree. The real problem is that Tax Increment Financing is an inappropriate funding source for building new schools and the real solution is finding or creating an appropriate funding mechanism that does not negatively effect revitalization efforts in Lents or anywhere else in Portland.
Kyle - June 26, 2008 03:33 PM
You are correct that the needs of the David Douglas and Portland Public schools are real. They are just entirely different needs. One has a falling enrollment and an excess of buildings and one has a rising enrollment and a shortage of buildings.
Psymonetta Isnoful - June 26, 2008 05:34 PM
The failing enrollment and excess of buildings...and rising enrollment and shortage of buildings are symptoms, not the actual problem(s). Thus the band-aid analogy. Addressing the symptom in DD school district doesn't solve the problem. Improving the viability of schools in lower-income/ affordable areas of the PPS school district solves problems for both school districts.
Kyle - June 28, 2008 08:41 AM
I think we disagree. DDSD's problem is not a symptom. It is a result of city planning. And addressing the issues of PPDS, while dearly needed, does not address the needs of the children in DDSD.
Psymoneta Isnoful - June 30, 2008 11:06 AM
The DDSD situation being a "result of city planning" is exactly why it is a symptom and not the real problem. I would also posit that PPS's poor management of their assets (ie making sure that every geographic area has high quality schools that prevent out-migration and over concentration) is another causative aspect. Building a new school in DDSD only addresses the symptom, and I would also argue that it contributes to the growth of the real problems.
Add a Comment: