printBroadcaster Lars Larson did a bang-up job, today, in shaming City of Oregon Mayor Dan Holladay for his ambient lawlessness: first, for securing appropriations in the cause of urban, central planning; next, in his haste to frustrate the democratic will of the outraged citizens.
The circumstances, courtesy of the Portland Tribune:
Mayor Dan Holladay’s opinion piece published in the Autumn 2015 Trail News, a publication providing citizens information on most city departments, told every household in the city that a petition to kill urban renewal would have a “very chilling effect on economic development” not just in the downtown urban renewal district, but throughout the city.
After the state received a complaint on Aug. 25 from petitioners, Holladay said he “made a mistake” by submitting the piece for the Trail News.
State law (ORS 260.432) says that elected officials shouldn’t publish letters advocating a political position in “a newsletter or other publication produced and distributed by public employees.” Oregon City’s mayor has for years submitted a piece to the “City Matters” column on page 2 of the city’s Trail News publication.
…
John Williams, one of the petitioners, offered this trenchant condemnation:
Holladay doubly misstepped by submitting the argument for a city publication before the measure had even gotten enough signatures to qualify for the ballot.
“He has the right to express his opinion, but he shouldn’t be using citizens’ taxpayer dollars to try to put a halt to a democratic process,” Williams said. “Signing the petition in question will not ‘put a halt to these programs and many others’ as he claims, but only put an issue on the ballot for citizens to debate.” …
And no representative ought to use “citizens’ taxpayer dollars” for job-creation programs. The narrowest interpretation of a local government’s authority ought to be pursued and adhered to by all local representatives, whatever their political stripe.
That government job-creation programs are a racket for the locality is abundantly clear in our neck of The Evergreen State. Paving over quaint, perfectly lovely trails is a political hobbyhorse around here.
Local politics is not my bailiwick; but when I do venture into the miasma, the blood boils at the excesses in the pink state.
Those who’re better suited to confront the juggernaut that is local government might find it useful to apprise themselves of the history and politics of Urban Renewal, a history that has a lot to do with making poor people go away by demolishing their homes—gentrification, if you will. City officials—they live off wealth others generate: taxes—“grow” concerned over “declining incomes in and tax revenues from certain neighborhoods.” They then use their power to designate them as “blighted.” Government’s hope, ultimately, is to generate more tax revenues from the neighborhoods.
The CATO Institute speaks to how cities use tax-increment financing (TIF) in the service of “crony capitalism and social engineering.” If you want to slum it, read about the history and politics of TIF.