Portland How-to

Nick,
    I continue to be amazed at how off the mark you are with regards to the Land Development Code rewrite. If you want what Portland did, we can do that! Because here's what they did:
    - They emphasized community values and the needs of everyone
    - They acknowledged their historical wrong-doings, and that the wealthy, white, centrally located neighborhoods were the product of systemic discrimination, not some crown jewel that should be preserved.
    - They ignored the protests of rich, white homeowners like you and me that swore that this would destroy the soul of Portland, and did the hard work of doing the right thing despite the political pressure to scale back, or otherwise water down their re-write.
    Better yet, when you look at what Portland actually did, how many of those reforms have you actively fought against in this very paper? Spoiler Alert: It's all of them.
    Which brings me to another big benefit they had – the editor of their “alt”-weekly wasn't writing regular screeds against the effort from a multi-million dollar home in one of the most desirable parts of town that has rapidly appreciated in value thanks to our broken land use policies. Watching an “alt”-weekly work this hard to carry water for the status quo has been down-right amazing.
    So you are right: Portland has done what we didn't have the stomach to do. You're wrong about what that is though. They prioritized the needs of the larger community over the rancor of those who are the benefactors of a broken system.
    For real though, you should get an editorial board.

   Publisher Nick Barbaro replies: It seems as though you've not really been paying attention to what I've actually been writing about for lo these many years. Hardly the status quo, but instead: • All kinds of housing in all parts of town. • Leverage zoning rules to maximize the amount of dedicated affordable housing developers are required to build. • Try not to accelerate gentrification and real estate speculation. • Do careful planning to achieve those goals. That's about it, though it's not as simple as it sounds. I don't actually know precisely how well Portland has done on those goals, but reports are generally good, and while some opposition has remained, they've come a lot closer to a consensus solution than Austin has had the stomach for – and I'd argue that failure is largely due to the kind of divisive rhetoric you engage in here. We're not enemies. Nor should the goal be to destroy neighborhoods. Portland, like Austin, has a lot of great, liveable, well-loved neighborhoods, and it would behoove us to build on them, and do what we can to improve their affordability.