Saltzman vs. Cornett: Race Heats Up
Kari Chisholm
The Portland Mercury reports today on the City Council showdown between incumbent Commissioner Dan Saltzman and challenger Jesse Cornett.
A week ago, Cornett invited Saltzman to debate police reform - and Saltzman refused, claiming Cornett was trying to "score political points" when people are dying at the hands of the police. From the Merc's Matt Davis:
Saltzman, who has so far cast himself in the race as a self-effacing but effective bureaucrat, is likely to feel the pinch as he heads into a grueling primary. For example, Cornett challenged Saltzman to a public debate on police issues on Tuesday, March 30, following the controversial police shootings of Aaron Campbell on January 29 and Jack Dale Collins on March 22.Saltzman's campaign manager, Emerald Bogue, sent a response letter from Saltzman to local reporters the following day.
"The community is not served by using the tragic deaths of Aaron Campbell and others to forward a political campaign," the letter read. "Or even more distastefully, a political career. We should honor their memories by making change, not demean them by trying to use their deaths to score political points." ...
The next morning, Cornett renewed his criticism of Saltzman in an interview with the Mercury, describing the police commissioner as "unwilling to do anything to save future lives."
"As somebody who's been a full-time paid professional politician for what, 17 years now, seeing if he can get his fourth term in city hall, it smacked of desperation to me," said Cornett of Saltzman's accusations of grandstanding.
According to the Merc, police reform isn't the only issue in the race:
Cornett plans to continue bringing up police accountability between now and the election, but feels Saltzman is also vulnerable on other issues. Cornett says his campaign's polling shows that voters are outraged by Saltzman's support for diverting $20 million of sewer money to spend on bike infrastructure, for example. And that they are unhappy with Saltzman for "making a rich family richer," by using public money to pay for Merritt Paulson's Major League Soccer (MLS) renovations at PGE Park.Cornett also contends that "fat cat" donors who want to preserve Portland's "status quo" are supporting Saltzman. Indeed, the commissioner's donors include Paulson's Peregrine Sports, parking-lot owner Greg Goodman, developers Homer Williams and Mark Edlen, the Portland Trail Blazers, and even the Gallatin Group, which does public relations for the Portland Police Association. ...
Saltzman says that it's "simply not true" to say he voted to divert money from the sewer budget for the bike plan.
"What I voted for... is to ensure that when we rip up a street for a sewer project, we put it back together in a way that matches the bike plan," he wrote in a written response to this article issued through his campaign office.
On MLS, Saltzman says the Paulson family is assuming the financial risk if projections don't pan out, and that "having an MLS team in Portland is a good thing."
As for fat cats, Saltzman says he has limited his campaign contributions to $500, and that his support comes "from people who are glad that I never settle for the status quo."
Saltzman had no comment on his alleged "Rose Garden strategy."
There's more coverage of last week's debate challenge from Jesse Cornett at the Oregonian and the Portland Tribune.
Visit JesseCornett.com and DanSaltzman.com. In addition to the two leading candidates, the ballot will include: Spencer Burton, Michael Courtney, Ed Garren, Martha Perez, Jason Renaud, Rudy Soto and Mary Volm.
 |
More Recent Posts | |
Albert Kaufman |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
Kari Chisholm |
Final pre-census estimate: Oregon's getting a sixth congressional seat |
Albert Kaufman |
Polluted by Money - How corporate cash corrupted one of the greenest states in America |
Guest Column |
|
Albert Kaufman |
Our Democrat Representatives in Action - What's on your wish list? |
Kari Chisholm |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
connect with blueoregon
10:03 a.m.
Apr 8, '10
[Full disclosure: My firm built Jesse Cornett's campaign website. I speak only for myself.]
Apr 8, '10
City Club will be hosting a debate between Jesse Cornett, Dan Saltzman and Mary Volm on April 23. Join us for what is sure to be an exciting debate. Learn more or buy tickets at http://pdxcityclub.org/content/friday-forums.
Apr 8, '10
Mary Volm looks good to me.
Apr 8, '10
How exactly how is it that the two boys having a pissing match in front of city hall get to be the "two leading" candidates?
I am really tired of pundits using the "horse race" to define a campaign race.
Take a look at the videos from the Rose City Neighborhood Association and you will see that Mary Volm has the city experience that money can not buy:
Mary Volm
The Incumbent
The Challenger
Mary has already lapped those boys a few times... which may be the reason why (yet another boy) fails to see her as as leading... or maybe it just has to do with money, loyalties and\or gender.
My vote is for Mary Volm with her 24 years of public service experience and leadership that the current city council severely lacks.
11:25 a.m.
Apr 8, '10
actually, what Saltzman did, in the middle of the main hearing on the Bike Plan, was throw out a plan that was not only unfeasible (something regarding cable fees) but had not been presented to his colleagues. he didn't even wait until Council discussion time after public testimony; he made sure to toss it out when the gallery was full of bike supporters. it was grandstanding and, like all content-free grandstanding, did more harm than good, making it seem as if there were multiple options for funding the bike plan. (i want the Bike Plan built -- it's a matter of my personal safety as well as my ability to make a living -- but i think in this case the $20 million should be returned to ratepayers. i do appreciate the Mayor's willingness to try to find innovative source of funding but i think i agree with Jesse on this.)
Saltzman's being more than disingenuous here: as Police Commissioner seeking re-election, talking about these issues is not optional. this is a democracy, Dan; you are our paid employee, and most of the City wants to have this brought into the open. don't blow us off with self-serving protestations about "not politicizing" this. that horse done left the barn years ago.
11:47 a.m.
Apr 8, '10
How exactly how is it that the two boys having a pissing match in front of city hall get to be the "two leading" candidates?
One is the incumbent. The other is the only one to have successfully qualified for public financing by collecing a thousand $5 checks.
At least for me, it's got nothing to do with gender.
I also suspect that's why the Mercury headlined their story "Saltzman vs. Cornett". But you'll have to ask them.
Apr 8, '10
Kari - I don't care that you disclose that you were/are employed by Jesse Cornett. That doesn't excuse your headline, the tenor of your article, or statement that these are "the two leading candidates." I don't suspect gender bias, just strong personal preference obfuscating otherwise good judgment. Collecting 1,000 $5 is not the only way of demonstrating viability and hiding behind a Mercury headline does not cut it. Disclaimer or not, this is poor form and I expect better from you.
I am currently undecided in this race, but I have met Mary Volm and heard her speak and she has a lot of good things to say. I don't want to see her chances of winning this thing shot down by biased journalists and bloggers who would like to make the decision for the voters.
Is there some poll out showing the other candidates polling below 5% that I am unaware of?
12:58 p.m.
Apr 8, '10
Be serious, volm supporters. You couldn't get 1,000 supporters to back her. It isn't all about money, but at $5 a pop it isn't about fatcat pols and donors either. I think obtaining public financing is a key metric of challenger viability, and one has it while the rest don't. That speaks volumes.
So Cornett is against the bike plan kickstart? That's interesting.
Apr 8, '10
Interesting Torridjoe,
1,000 people giving $5 decides for the rest of the 347,868 registered voters in Portland.
Funny, you are forgetting the fact that she was the key spokesperson for the city, remember all the major snow storms when Mary was on T.V. advising citizens (honestly and knowledgeable) about Transportation. Or how about when she launched BikeFest back before bikes were hip. Then there is the "Your City Your Choice" program she created to encourage and educate the public about the city budget.
But this is really what it comes down to for me, this election Portlanders have a choice (if they vote in the city council race) to:
1) Keep the voting block of Sam, Dan and Randy
2) Have a voting block of Sam, Jesse and Randy
or ( and what I am believe is best for our city )
3) Have a voting block of Mary, Amanda and Nick
But then again, I guess you fail to see the 1000's of people that Mary has worked with (including Amanda and Nick) over her 24 years of public service.
Interesting indeed.
1:26 p.m.
Apr 8, '10
Dylan --
I didn't really write much, just clipped the relevant paragraphs from the Mercury article. Covering the coverage, as usual.
I suppose you could argue with "two leading candidates", and that's a reasonable discussion, but that's my analysis -- which is what I'm supposed to be doing here.
If I had written, "In addition to those two candidates, the ballot will include..." the piece would have been devoid of analysis entirely.
Your response seems a bit over the top, for what looks to be a fairly minor adjective choice.
10:17 a.m.
May 19, '10
I feel a bit vindicated in my comments after seeing Jesse Cornett get just 8% of the vote. Your analysis of the "two leading candidates" was clearly off the mark. While Mary Volm did not do well either (still 50% more votes than Cornett), you wonder how much better she would have done if the race had been framed by "analysts" a little better than it was here.
I disagree that you could not have framed this article better without it being devoid of analysis (which in this case, may not have been a bad thing). And if you need to make a choice between republishing a poor article or providing meaningless analysis, maybe the choice ought to be neither. Just sayin'.
I do agree that my tone in my prior post was a little over the top. I get a little worked up some times, but I stand by my the general sentiment.
Apr 8, '10
Note to Volm supporters...I would encourage your candidate to stop harkening back to Neil Goldschmidt...might not be the best strategy...
Apr 8, '10
"But then again, I guess you fail to see the 1000's of people that Mary has worked with (including Amanda and Nick) over her 24 years of public service."
Jasun: How come less than 1000 of those thousands made a $5 donation to her?
And somebody told me that you are romantically involved with her. Nothing wrong with that, of course.
2:48 p.m.
Apr 8, '10
City politics is a snoozer for me. I'd fall asleep in a city council meeting. But, the fact that there is a person in the race who is free from having to do favors for campaign donors once elected, that makes me sit up and take notice.
I'm personally not a fan of saying anything about political opponents at all in elections. I like it when candidates just focus on what THEY would do if elected. Let the other guy or gal take the low road.
Having said that, I still think Jesse Cornnet has my vote for the simple reason that I can trust he is not bought, sold or paid for politically.
5:27 p.m.
Apr 8, '10
Cornett got over 1200 signatures for Voter-owened Elections. Volm got 400+ (if i remember correctly).
Cornett demonstrated an existing network of support that indicates viability. Volm did not.
i like Mary & think she has a lot to offer, but Jesse is the right candidate to retire Saltzman and bring a combination of intelligence, energy & innovation to City Hall. Jason can whoop her up all he wants; she's going to finish a far distant 3rd.
10:04 a.m.
May 19, '10
...and Mary Volm trounced Cornett on election day. Cornett had $150K of public money at his disposal and barely beat out Rudy Soto for a distant third place. Viability? Heh. Man, you Blue Oregon guys got some mighty strong Kool-Aid.
5:47 p.m.
Apr 8, '10
I don't live in PDX, so I don't have a dog in this hunt...
But Jason said:
1,000 people giving $5 decides for the rest of the 347,868 registered voters in Portland.
In terms of who the front-runner is, yeah they do, at least initially. That's the nature of the way it's set up.
5:48 a.m.
Apr 9, '10
TJ
I don't speak for Jesse, but opposing a diversion of $20 million in sewer funding to bike infrastructure is a lot different than opposing the 2030 Plan (which Jesse has publicly supported).
When he asked me for my endorsement on his webpage, I did ask him specifically about the diversion, which I thought was pretty outrageous.
His response was that he did not support using the sewer fees for this purpose, or any other purposes not related to water or sewer. He wanted to find the funds for Build It from the general fund.
I still amazed that the Council voted 5-0 in favor of diverting 20 million and are now shocked, shocked, to learn that Portlanders, who pay the highest combined water/sewer rates in the country, are angry about this.
You couldn't make it more clear how out of touch the current Council is with the daily lives of most of our city dwellers. The water/sewer fund is not a piggy bank for this or that pet project.
8:43 a.m.
Apr 9, '10
The whole point of the signature gathering exercise was/is to show breath of support, which then leads to public funds.
A candidate who argues that they have X years of public service and X thousands of people served should have an edge in the number of signatures gathered, unless the thousands of contacts were somehow less than optimal for the contactees.
Also, designing and delivering information as a spokesperson doesn't automatically imply competence (or incompetence) at governing.
Just sayin'.
Apr 9, '10
I have met most of the Position 3 candidates and believe that they all have good things to offer this community.
I am not so naive to be shocked at negative campaigning, but in this context it seems incredibly shortsighted and counterproductive.
There are many people who are disappointed in Dan Saltzman and believe that this city needs someone new in that seat. Next month, if Dan fails to get 50%+1, he will be in a fall runoff against the other top vote-getter.
What that means is that next month Portland voters will not face the awful "lesser of two evils" choice and are free to vote for the candidate who most appeals to them without feeling that they are wasting thier vote.
Those who are trying to see Dan Saltzman unseated --a group which includes both Mary and Jesse --should recognize their common interest and focus their energy on Saltzman, not each other. This election is too important for this city.
John
Apr 9, '10
Thank You John for making a great point about thinking about the General Election.
Last night I was at the Buckman Neighborhood Association forum and Dan's leadership is very much in questions.
The question you raise is a wise forward thinking one, who can beat Dan in the General? For me that is Mary Volm with her 24 years of public service experience, high name recognition and ability to effectively communicate via the media.
As I see it, Jesse agrees with almost all of Mary's ideas, however is $150,000 enough money to get his name out. Also can his status as "VOE candidate, co-founder of the Bus Project and Blue Oregon" get volunteers? Keep in mind that the Bus Project, Blue Oregon and the rest of Portland will be focused on the much larger Gubernatorial, Federal and State legislative races.
The city race, as important as it is, will mainly rely on how well a person is known to non-political Portlanders and getting them to actually turn their ballot over, find the city council seat 3 race, all the way at the bottom and mark it.
Mary Volm is the one who has the city wide positive name recognition built over the past 24 years to make this happen.
When you vote in the Primary ask yourself, "Who will the non-political minded public vote for in the General?" against the Incumbent?
Mary Volm is the person to support now and vote for in the Primary to ensure that the incumbent is not in office next year.
Apr 9, '10
Jasun...positive name recognition? I'll bet you dinner that neither Mary or Jesse have name ID above 5-10% city wide...
Apr 9, '10
Mary Volm's playing the gender card is insulting to those of us who would LOVE to support a qualified woman candidate.
I'm 36, female, and wish we had more women on the City Council. But Mary Volm strikes me as self-absorbed (she describes herself on her Facebook page as "amazing"), out of her league (name-drops people she worked with years ago as though that counts as a qualification) and seems creepy to me.
2:25 p.m.
Apr 9, '10
I'm not surprised to see Jesse repeating the lie that the council voted to "divert $20 million in sewer funding to bike paths", I watched a previous campaign that Jesse managed and he appeared willing to say anything if it furthered his cause, no matter how far from the truth it might be.
I do realize the media have been gleefully repeating the same lie over and over.
I am surprised, however, at some of the people here who have gotten all hot-and-bothered without bothering to check into what the unanimous vote of city council was actually about.
The city has some money that was collected for sewer projects that cost less than the projections. One of the sewer projects on the city's list of sewer projects is the "green streets" project. Green streets reconfigures streets with on-site stormwater handling so that stormwater does not end up in the sewer system with the sewage. If you can cut down on the stormwater going into the sewers significantly you can handle sewage more efficiently and cut down on sewage overflows into our waterways.
The city also has a list of streets intended for bicycle improvements. What the city council voted for was to take the possible candidates for green streets improvements and compare that to the list of streets intended for bicycle improvements and spend $20 million dollars of sewer money doing green streets projects on streets slated for bicycle improvements and spending transportation money slated for bicycle improvements on those streets at the same time, coordinating the work. Amanda Fritz explains her vote for it quite cogently on her blog.
That's exactly the sort of thinking I want to see from our city commissioners. The standard way of doing things would be to spend even more money doing those projects completely independently. In the past it would not have been unusual to see new bike striping go down and six months later see all of it torn up to do a sewer project.
There may be legitimate debates over whether or not the sewer projects savings should have been rebated to ratepayers rather than spent on other sewer projects. There may be legitimate debates over whether or not green streets is the best use of sewer money. Of course, we aren't having any of those debates because we are too busy freaking out over a "diversion of sewer money to bicycle projects" that never happened.
Apr 9, '10
Jason (and other folks still reading),
Thanks for the response, but you're taking the wrong point from my comment. I did NOT urge people to pick the strongest candidate to advance to the general. In fact, I said just the opposite: next month people should support who they want to support, without regard to any Machiavellian machinations.
The reason is that I think any of the leading challengers could be strong in a 1-to-1 race, provided he or she crafts a message that will resonate with the large number of people ready for a change on the Council. And they'll have almost 6 months to do so.
The worst scenario, and the one which I think the negativity feeds, is a large number of late-deciding voters who look at the array of challengers, slicing each other to pieces, and decide that the devil they know is better than the devil they don't. This is what Saltzman is counting on, and so far he's getting it.
Since you've engaged with this conversation, I'll tell you my specific concern with Mary. (Though I'm not letting anybody else off the hook either.)
As you know, Mary was one of several of the candidates who attended our neighborhood event at Coffee Lovers here on Foster Road a couple months ago. Although she touched on a couple of issues, the main thing that she and her supporters spent their energy on was the supposed issue of Ed Garren being somewhat recently migrated from Los Angeles.
Your campaign seemed to believe that you had a great "zinger" that would resonate with the people in the room, but honestly you just sounded lame. It wouldn't surprise me if you got a couple of supporters that night --for Saltzman.
So I'm imploring you and the other candidates: please change your tone and run a positive, issue-based campaign. Once the community can rally around one specific challenger, the voters will respond positively, whether its Mary or Jesse or someone else. But if you blow this opportunity and hand Saltzman an outright win next month, I can assure you I wouldn't support any of you for dogcatcher in the future.
Thx, John
Apr 10, '10
I can;t believe I am saying this, but I really think we need to advocate for Mr Cornett.
My issue with Saltzman is more of the same: - SHrug of shoulders at police shootings (Sma/Randy the same) - Sees raising ratepayer ratres on water (like 17$ last year is only the beginning) to finance bike paths as a proper use of funds. - Has teh same rat pack of developers (Powell, Paulson, Homer, Gerding) funding his re-election campaign.
If Mr COrnett is willing to speak for the average person, he has my vote over Saltzman.
YOu how have a chance to prove your progressive bonafides.
Apr 10, '10
I read some of Saltzman's stuff from when he first ran. Sounds identical to Jesse Cornett. I was at night skiing recently and caught up with Portland friends and we had a heated discussion about this. My gripe was that they don't seem to be able to assimilate. A pony and a horse are two different animals. Not literally, but there seems to be little political intelligence to see someone as the same person, at different stages of maturity. The pattern seems to be to start off idealistic, but supported by a gang of insiders, get some power, immediately start campaigning for the next higher office, and when you reach your desired level, then start acting like Saltzman.
Tell me how Jesse is not following the exact same path as Saltzman. Isn't insanity repeating the same behavior but expecting a different outcome? They're probably having a beer and a laugh on us, as we speak. Tell me how Jesse, now, is different than Dan, then.
Apr 10, '10
"Tell me how Jesse is not following the exact same path as Saltzman"
By your own admission, Saltzman is already there and bought/paid for, at least Cornett has a choice not to sell out.
Apr 11, '10
Uh, yeah, but could you work with me here, Steve? Rather than leave it to hoping he makes better choices, can't we find trends that will predict candidates that are more likely to make better choices? I agree with your bottom line. How is it our choice is between bought and paid for and probably lying about his intentions? Oh, bought and paid for made sure the process only let candidates that operate via teh same kind of cronyism qualify for the ballot. Oh, FWIW, I gave a friend in SE $5 and talked them into donating to Jesse, druing the initial qualification, so I'm not anti-Jesse.
"Posted by: Pat Ryan | Apr 9, 2010 8:43:42 AM
The whole point of the signature gathering exercise was/is to show breath of support, which then leads to public funds."
That's a very, very funny Freudian slip, or a very funny pun. The process measured how well you can put a machine together, because everyone wants to keep the pure thinkers out of (local) gov.
Of course Volm and Renaud don't stack up as being likely to get real anymore than Saltzman and Cornett. Spencer Burton seems to think by sticking his finger in the air. If you want the winner on the "most likely to think for themselves and has a clue" criterion, it has to be Ed Garren. Yes he's a cantankerous patronizing alpha male, too, but at least one could adjudicate proponderence of the evidence and trust him. Most important, you could trust him not to flip.
It seems to me that the only people that care are looking to pure profit as a motive with a large measure of personal ego thrown in. THAT is what you are trying to replace, where Saltzman is concerned. His idealism WAS good. Don't discuss positions, discuss process. It's not like a teabagger is gonna win the race. I think Jason and Ed might call PDX voters' attitudes "functionally fixated".
So, I agree 100%, Steve, up to that point where you repeat the new "hope and change Democrtic mantra", "yeah, this is probably a load too, but it's better than the alternative, which you CAN'T vote for." I don't call that a choice, or a respnosible way to use my vote (not that I have one in this race). Would that I could ignore this and enough PDX'ers cared for the reasons that matter.
Apr 11, '10
"How is it our choice is between bought and paid for and probably lying about his intentions?"
That's a different issue than Saltzman v. Cornett. Any one of these people I am holding my nose while we vote.
However, if you look at the cabal running this town (Adams/Leonard/Saltxman) you see a lot of politics heavy on turning downtown into SIM city and then letting the rest of town go to hell - whether its infrastructure, schools or police or water bills to fund it all now.
<h2>I guess I am fervently hoping someone elase will be different than the sell-outs we have now.</h2>