Isaac Laquedem

Wayne Scott explains Oregon's school funding problem

When Wayne Scott, the majority leader of the Oregon House of Representatives, was tagged for not reporting a Hawaii junket on his disclosure forms, he said that he didn't realize that his trip to a Maui resort (paid for by the beer and wine distributors) cost more than the reporting limit.  The reporting limit is $144.

That explains why the legislature pinches pennies when it funds our public schools: they figure that if $143.99 can buy a Hawaii resort vacation, $7000 a student should be able to buy a first-rate education.

George Bernard Shaw comments on the Oregon legislature

The stories this week about our legislators enjoying weekends in Maui at the expense of the Oregon Restaurant and Beverage Association and its members brought to mind this passage from The Apple Cart, a play by George Bernard Shaw.  The play describes a polite power struggle between Magnus, the king of Great Britain, and his prime minister, Proteus.  The cabinet includes a number of party hacks, some devoted public servants, and a union leader, Boanerges, as the minister of labor.  Early in the play the ministers admit that most of them are directed by a large industrial combine, Breakages, Ltd., which wines and dines them regularly.  As they discuss this, one minister, Crassus, invites them all to lunch at the Ritz, saying grandly that Breakages, Ltd. will pay, and only Boanerges turns him down:

PROTEUS.  His last wriggle.  Never mind: we have him safe enough. What about lunch?  I am starving.  Will you lunch with me, Lizzie.

LYSISTRATA.  Dont speak to me.  [She rushes out distractedly].

AMANDA.  Poor darling Lizzie!  She's a regular old true blue Diehard.  If only I had her brains and education! or if she had my variety talent! what a queen she'd make!  Like old Queen Elizabeth, eh?  Dont grieve, Joe: I'll lunch with you since youre so pressing.

CRASSUS.  Come and lunch with me--all of you.

AMANDA.  What opulence!  Can you afford it?

CRASSUS.  Breakages will pay.  They have a standing account at the Ritz.  Over five thousand a year, it comes to.

PROTEUS.  Right.  Let us spoil the Egyptians.

BOANERGES [with Roman dignity]  My lunch will cost me one and sixpence; and I shall pay for it myself [he stalks out].

Who among our legislature buys his or her own lunch instead of accepting the hospitality of our state's version of Breakages, Ltd.?  Now would be a good time to mention that happy fact in public.

A Hawaii vacation is not so memorable if you're a legislator

Four more legislators have come forward, or have been pushed forward, to say that they, too, accepted trips to Hawaii from the beer and wine distributors or their lobbyist, and didn't report the value of the trips on their ethics disclosure forms.  Maybe when the surf's up, their memories are down.

Two remedies occurred to me for this deplorable epidemic of selective memory.  One is to suggest that the Secretary of State, on the disclosure forms that he sends to legislators, include a preprinted line that says "Where did the beer and wine distributors take you last year?"

The other, more arch remedy is to send all of the legislators to the first day of third grade, where they will join the youngsters in writing the traditional essay called "What I did on my summer vacation."

A Hawaii weekend for only $144, everything included

This morning the Oregonian tagged three state legislators for not reporting that in 2004, they accepted an all-expense-paid trip to a Maui resort from beer and wine distributors.  Oregon law requires legislators to report certain freebies that they receive above a certain amount in value.  In 2004, the threshold was $144.  Senator David Nelson and Representative Derrick Kitts said that they didn't report the trip because the lobbyist for the beer and wine distributors, Paul Romain, told them they didn't have to.  Representative Wayne Scott's excuse was more interesting, and explains a lot about the Oregon legislature.  As quoted by the Oregonian, he said that he assumed that the trip was under the limit because Mr. Romain didn't tell him that it was over the $144 limit.

Let's see: Mr. Scott (who is the House majority leader) is in effect saying that he didn't report the junket because in 2004 he thought that it was possible to fly to Hawaii and back, stay in a Maui resort (here's its website; it's several notches above a Motel 6), and have the meals provided, all for less than $144.  I think I'll see if he'd like a job as a travel agent.

Information gladly taken away while the train is in motion?

TriMet's light rail cars used to have little stickers near the driver's compartments, that said "Information gladly given; however, please don't disturb the operator while the train is in motion."  Then a few months ago I saw new stickers that said something like "Please do not disturb the operator while the train is in motion."   Today I rode on a traincar with no sticker at all.  I can't decide whether that means that it's now okay to disturb the driver while the train is in motion, or if it means that the drivers are no longer glad to give information.

Youlee You and the law: A recommendation for Governor Kulongoski

The Oregonian reports today that Youlee You is resigning her seat as a Multnomah County circuit court judge.  This is in response to the Secretary of State ruling her off the November ballot because she had not lived in Oregon for the full three years immediately preceding the date she filed, which is a statutory qualification (ORS 3.041(5)).  Judge You was appointed to the bench a few months ago to replace Jan Wyers, who had resigned, and was running to keep her seat.  Her only opponent, Leslie Roberts (who lives next door to Judge You) filed a complaint with the Secretary of State, alleging that Judge You didn't meet the residency requirement.

Steve Duin says that Ms. Roberts has set a new standard in shamelessness, and quotes three of the Multnomah County judges (Ms. Roberts' future co-workers) as follows:

Circuit Judge Jean Maurer said, "I'm appalled. By filing at the last minute, she (Roberts) effectively ensured she would be the only person on the ballot." Judge Keith Meisenheimer added, "Character issues are raised by this. Every judge I've talked to has the same view."

And Judge Michael McShane lowered the boom, noting that at the same time You was "telling me about her wonderful neighbor," Roberts "stabbed" her in the back: "The whole courthouse can't get over this. I can't imagine that she could get this job," McShane said, but through "cruelty."

For the reasons I outlined on September 10, I don't agree with Mr. Duin and the judges: everyone, even a judicial candidate, has the right to see that the law is obeyed, something they don't seem to be keeping in mind.  However, it's clear that this unfortunate situation isn't the fault of Ms. You -- there's plenty of blame to go around, including some for the Governor, who appointed Ms. You to the bench despite apparently having been told by Ms. Roberts that Ms. You didn't meet the statutory requirement.  (Ms. You won't meet the statutory requirement until January 2007.)  It seems to me that Governor Kulongoski should do something to make it up to Ms. You, and I've figured out how he can do it.

ORS 3.041 requires a circuit court judge to have been a resident of Oregon for the three years immediately preceding the date that the judge is appointed or files to run for election.   ORS 2.020 imposes the same requirement on judges of the Oregon supreme court.  Oddly, there is no similar requirement for judges of the Oregon court of appeals, who must merely be registered to vote in their county of residence and be members of of the Oregon State Bar.

R. William Riggs has announced that he will retire from the Oregon supreme court before December 31 so that Governor Kulongoski can appoint his successor.   Ms. You won't meet the three-year requirement by December 31, and appointees to the supreme court tend to have more judicial experience than she has, so she's not a candidate to be appointed to the supreme court.  Most likely the governor will promote one of the judges of the court of appeals.

That will create a vacancy on the court of appeals, and Ms. You is qualified to be appointed to it, because she is registered to vote in Multnomah County and is a member of the Oregon State Bar.  (Recall that appeals court judges aren't subject to the three-year residency rule.)  Ms. You would undoubtedly be a fine addition to the court of appeals, where she will review decisions of the trial courts, including, perhaps, those of her neighbor, the future Judge Roberts.

$3 million for Homer might be a good deal, after all

I was prepared to be offended at the City of Portland paying $3 million for development rights that its appraiser now says are worth only $1.5 million (see the Oregonian's story here, and Jack Bog's post and readers' comments on the topic, here), until I crunched some numbers.  First, the background.  The City agreed to pay a company controlled by Homer Williams $3 million for the right to build 400 units of affordable housing on top of a two-block parking garage that OHSU is going to build in North Macadam / South Waterfront.  After the City agreed to pay $3 million, the City's appraiser said the development rights are worth only $1.5 million.

I'm not so sure it's a bad deal for the City.  In fact, I think the City could make it a good deal, in either of two ways. 

First, the number-crunching.  In evaluating multi-family land, the important number is the price per unit.  If the City can build 400 units here, and if there are no hidden costs (a big "if"), then this works out to a land (air) cost of $7500 per unit, which is at the low end of what people are paying for apartment sites in Portland.  The City may have got a good deal out of this, even if it wasn't intentional.

What, then, should the City do with its good fortune?  One answer is to sell the development rights (on the open market, please) and let the buyer build unaffordable housing above the OHSU garage.  The City might be able to get $20,000 or $25,000 a unit for the development rights and actually turn a profit on the deal in the range of $4 million or more, which the City could use to provide affordable housing somewhere else.

As an alternative, the City now has an affordable way to diversify the impact of social services that until now have landed hard on the Buckman neighborhood.  It's apparent to anyone who passes by Pioneer Square that our city has a fair number of homeless people on the streets, who seem to spend their time on and around the bus mall.  As the trolley will connect South Waterfront to the bus mall, this is a logical place to build a homeless shelter and transitional housing.  It's been surmised that some of the street people are there because of drug problems, and as the tram will connect the area to treatment facilities at OHSU, it's doubly logical to use these two blocks to provide social services in the form of housing.  I'm realistic and politically incorrect enough to point out that the concentrated presence of social services on these two blocks will help to make the housing across the street more affordable, also.

You be the judge? Not so fast, says her opponent

I read with interest the contretemps between Youlee You, a judge of the Multnomah County circuit court, and Leslie Roberts, a Portland attorney who is running for election to that seat.  Judge You was appointed to fill a vacancy, and was to be on the ballot this fall, running for a full term.  Judge You and Ms. Roberts were neighbors, and apparently friends, for many years, until Ms. You (not then on the bench) sold her house some years back and moved to California. 

About three years ago the former You house came on the market.  Ms. Roberts, who had kept in touch with Ms. You and her husband, knew that they wanted to return to Portland, and told them that their old house was for sale.  Ms. You and her husband repurchased it, and moved back into it.  This was in late 2003.

Fast forward to the fall of 2006.  Ms. You, now appointed to the bench by the governor, files to be elected to a full term.  Ms. Roberts files to run against her.  No one else files.  Ms. Roberts (who struck me as extremely detail-oriented and thorough when I knew her, some years ago) knows that Oregon law requires a candidate for circuit court judge to have been a resident of Oregon for the three years preceding the date of filing.  She tells the elections people that Judge You hasn't lived in Oregon for all of the three years before she filed for election, and therefore doesn't meet the statutory requirement to run for the seat.  Ultimately the secretary of state agreed, meaning that Ms. Roberts will appear unopposed on the ballot.  Judge You's lawyer believes the three-year residency requirement is unconstitutional, but has not so far filed anything to return his client to the ballot.

I understand all that.  The part that I'm having trouble with is the reaction of some of the judges on the bench, who apparently think it's unsporting for one person who wants to be a judge to point out to the proper authority that another person running for the same seat doesn't meet the statutory requirements to run for that seat.  The Oregonian article I linked to above includes this passage:

The problem has ruffled the Multnomah County court, where five judges have endorsed You. Judge Michael McShane said Tuesday that Roberts had injected sharp-elbow politics into the usually polite affair of judgeship races.

"Lady Macbeth is not who we aspire to be as judges," McShane said. "It doesn't help the bench at all."

Whatever the sitting judges may think of Judge You (who as far as I know is a fine person and a good judge), I would have thought they would want all the candidates to play by the rules, and not criticize one candidate for suggesting that another candidate doesn't meet the statutory requirements.

Pluto may not be a planet, but it has three moons

I learned something I didn't know from last month's astronomical discussion of Pluto, which is that last year two more Plutonian satellites were discovered.  They are very small compared to Pluto's first-known satellite, Charon, and might be only about 50 miles across.  How hard are they to see?  Their apparent diameter as seen from earth is about the same as that of an aspirin tablet seen from a spy satellite.  Here's an animation of how Charon and the two newbies orbit Pluto.

A side effect of voting Pluto out of the club

Does the astronomers' vote that Pluto is no longer a planet mean that Clyde Tombaugh, the man who discovered it, is no longer famous?