Skip to main content
Seven months into the city’s new form of government, it’s increasingly clear that six of the Portland City Council’s 12 members—a progressive bloc that calls itself “Peacock”—are setting the agenda at City Hall.
A message thread shared among those six councilors shows them in close coordination on policies, votes and messaging that comes before the City Council. Four of those councilors are members of the Democratic Socialists of America: Mitch Green, Sameer Kanal, Tiffany Koyama Lane and Angelita Morillo. Two allies, Councilors Candace Avalos and Jamie Dunphy, round out the group thread.
The 300 pages of text messages obtained by WW through a public records request show that Peacock (short for “progressive caucus”) has organized tightly and effectively. The messages also show members of the left flank of the council effusively cheering each other on, while sometimes making snide comments about their centrist adversaries.
City officials have long coordinated strategy with each other outside council chambers, speaking candidly and colorfully behind the closed doors of their offices. It’s no surprise that a new generation of leaders carries on that tradition. But never in recent memory have so many members of the council committed those thoughts to an electronic document that is saved for posterity, as the progressive councilors have with the Peacock thread.
The messages provide an unusually clear window into the thinking of a group of councilors who are driving the agenda at City Hall. The clout of the progressive councilors, especially the four socialists, has fascinated observers as the budget cycle played out this spring (“Better Off Red?” WW, June 16). Some Portlanders view these six councilors as a civic bulwark against the growing power of billionaires and a despot in the White House. Others see them as a threat to Portland’s precarious economic recovery.
These messages show how the councilors view themselves, and their mission in office.
The bulk of the messages were exchanged during May and June budget hearings in which the council debated and voted on dozens of amendments to Mayor Keith Wilson’s proposed budget. The messages show what onlookers could only guess by observing from the outside: Peacock moved as a voting bloc more often than not, and pushed to have priority amendments heard by closely coordinating on strategy and execution, often putting some of their centrist colleagues on their heels.
Councilors Kanal, Avalos, Koyama Lane and Morillo stand by the chat and its contents.
“I am not ashamed of the hard work we had to do to deliver real wins for our communities,” Avalos says, adding that “holding the Police Bureau to a high standard isn’t personal—it’s our responsibility.”
Kanal says the responsibility of the new council is to “challenge traditional power structures, including the fossil fuel industry and police, that haven’t always served all Portlanders. That means asking tough questions at times—and expecting accountability.”
Morillo says her top aims are “making a Portland that’s affordable for working-class people, and protecting the human rights of immigrants and other groups being targeted by Trump,” and “if it takes a group chat to deliver those priorities, that’s fine with me.”
Koyama Lane says, “What is revealed in these chats is simply the work of humans transforming Portland City Hall on behalf of the community in real time.”
Dunphy and Green did not respond to a request for comment.
This week, we examine how the Peacock councilors coordinated strategy to pass their budget amendments. In next week’s issue, we’ll take a closer look at how they spoke of their colleagues, as well as the leadership of a city bureau.
On March 26, Councilor Candace Avalos texts her colleagues about establishing a joint agenda for Peacock.
Avalos: I’ve asked Andres [unclear whom she’s referring to] to help us with a first draft of a “peacock platform,” looking at all your campaign websites and combining our priorities.
On May 18, Councilor Sameer Kanal sends a list of budget amendments to the group labeled “Peacock Amendments.”
Kanal: I’m going to put things in here as I get them, please feel free to add things starting in a few minutes when I get the structure set up.
On May 20, the day before the first of the council’s marathon budget sessions, Councilor Angelita Morillo updates the group on one of her top priorities: an amendment to siphon $2 million in new funding from the Portland Police Bureau. Morillo’s message makes it clear that she and other councilors have agreed to strip the money earmarked for the police budget, but are still negotiating where to redirect the savings. The leading contender? Outdoor maintenance of city parks. Portland Parks & Recreation took steep cuts in Wilson’s proposed budget, and filling that hole is a priority for Councilor Steve Novick, who is not a member of Peacock and often serves as the council’s swing vote.
Morillo: I just wanted to update everyone on the $2M from police. Sounds like Steve wants it to go to parks maintenance and his vote might be contingent on that, his second option is my Cesar E Chavez amendment [to reroute $800,000 from the Police Bureau to complete pedestrian safety improvements along César E. Chávez Boulevard] and Candace wanted to combine that with housing stuff since the Cesar E stuff only requires 800,000.
Morillo writes in the thread that other ideas for funding parks maintenance look like dead ends, so the police money has a destination.
Morillo: many of our fundraising things are not going to make it, likely. Prosper, golf fees, etc. so we’re probably going to have to use it for Parks
The May 21 meeting of the City Council kicks off. The budget amendments are the main event, but the council must first wade through a number of other votes. During those discussions, the progressive councilors become increasingly convinced that their centrist colleagues are running out the clock so the mayor’s budget will pass without significant changes. They also speak critically of Council President Elana Pirtle-Guiney’s “president’s package” of amendments that she hoped could speed the process by consolidating a number of amendments into one vote. Peacock councilors pointed out that most were by non-Peacock members and few were by councilors of color.
Morillo: the issue that the way this was set up and placed, whoever gets their things through first wins. They’re burning the candle down as quickly as they can so there’s no time.
Kanal: last night i said i was inclined to support it. Right now, I am finding the process argument against this to be increasingly compelling, as well as the process’ implication for an austerity budget.
Morillo: we are going to run up to midnight and we will pass the Mayor’s budget essentially. I hope everyone is very clear that they set up an incredible game. Honestly kudos to them it was brilliant
Avalos: yes this is absolutely by design. I’m not willing to just accept it. I didn’t wear red for no reason!!! Lmao
Dunphy: ok. I’ll oppose it [the president’s package] with y’all
Morillo: steve is also against it
Koyama Lane: it’s also the process and lack of transparency for me—they’re trying to block this from being a collaborative, generative process with this new representative group of electeds
Dunphy: do we need to figure out a way to bring Steve into peacock without violating quorum?
Avalos: he’s an honorary member, the 7th man
As the council moves on to the budget session, it briefly appears the parks budget hole may be filled by other means. This sparks a discussion of how else the diverted police funding might be used.
Morillo: and this will free up the police money for other stuff, more wins for us
Avalos: so wait- if this passes, what do we do with our police amendment? Will we just keep funding more of the parks stuff?
Councilor Dan Ryan says he’s concerned after hearing that an amendment by Kanal would result in 17.5 police officer positions becoming limited in duration, despite the City Budget Office saying that’s not the case. Councilors discuss the dispute with Police Chief Bob Day and budget director Ruth Levine.
Morillo: THEY ARE FILIBUSTERING YOU GUYS
Avalos: they are - what do we do?
Morillo: There are not enough votes for this, we need whoever is next to move us past this. This is so transparent.
Avalos: after sameer cooks, we should all just vote no and then no
Morillo: they’re goading us into a long debate which is not the question at hand
Kanal: i agree. It took me a minute to pause and get to this point but this IS a filibuster.
Koyama Lane: they’re gonna want to try to slow roll us and then just pass the mayor’s proposed budget.
Later that day, the council discusses an $11 million cut to Prosper Portland proposed by Councilors Mitch Green and Jamie Dunphy. From the dais, Avalos expresses doubts. Morillo publicly suggests amending the proposal to reduce the cut by half. She types her changes into the group chat.
Morillo: candace r u on board
Avalos: I don’t know
Morillo: We need money if you guys want to fund housing and shit. Or else we can approve the mayor’s budget
Still later on May 21, Peacock councilors discuss bringing forward Morillo’s amendment to reroute $2 million in new funding from the Police Bureau to parks maintenance. (Avalos proposed a similar amendment; it was technically hers that would be taken up for debate and get a vote at the end of the night.) Council Vice President Tiffany Koyama Lane kicks off the discussion by relaying a question from Council President Elana Pirtle-Guiney: What’s the top priority for the progressive caucus?
Koyama Lane: EPG is asking if there are “must get a vote on amendments” that Peacock wants to prioritize.
Morillo: 2m from police. Easy peasy.
Avalos: we need the parks money from police. And it has the votes.
Morillo: Steve said he’d only support the police amendment if it went to parks maintenance. We have not filled the parks hole. we will lose his vote
Kanal: then do that with the 2m
As the night wears on, Peacock members grow nervous that Novick has lost his appetite for rerouting the police money.
Morillo: if steve does not step up for the police vote we need to push it, we will lose momentum.
Avalos: i think he’s still down
Morillo: elana scared him. Im writing notes to him rn lol
Avalos: elana scared steve on the police vote??
Morillo: he said she got mad so he’s hesitating and i said she’s not our mommy. I’m trying.
Avalos: that’s wild. If he doesn’t vote for it wheres he think he’s getting maintenance for parks money??
Morillo: no he will support the vote. He’s just reluctant to force the vote tonight.
Kanal: i will believe it after it happens. That’s his way out, he’s bailing.
As midnight draws near and Pirtle-Guiney tries to bring the May 21 budget meeting to a close, progressive councilors coordinate closely to get the redirecting of police funding into the queue for debate and a vote.
Avalos: how does this happen - is it that we would take a vote to reorder or something?
Morillo: i’m gonna ask my staff to look into it, but I think we can do it. If not logistically, politically. but I need you to push. I’ll set the ball up for you candace, you gotta be ready to bat.
Avalos: alrighty im ready
At 11:11 pm, Morillo announces she’s hatched a plan to bring the police funding discussion to the dais.
Morillo: i’m getting this parks police vote. Stay awake.
Avalos: I’m no longer tired IM WIRED
Dunphy: LETS F’ING GO YALLLL
Koyama Lane: maybe we all go out after this lol. Jk
Avalos: OH SNAP that would really tick her [Pirtle-Guiney] off lmaoooo
Green: we could go to the yammi [the Yamhill Pub] if you got your tetanus shot updated
Morillo: Candace be ready to put your hand up for the first parks amendment. We are getting it out tonight. We will rush through this.
Koyama Lane: Steve is ready to vote on this tonight
Avalos: Sameer youre in the queue to yield to me yes?
Koyama Lane: is she trying to close this out?
Kanal: trust me
Green: sameer is cooking just trust him
Nearing midnight, Peacock uses Robert’s Rules of Order to force the police amendment discussion. As the council debates, members of Peacock take stock of the vote.
Kanal: where is steve on this
Morillo: if he fails us. He is dead to me.
Avalos: all of peacock needs to get in the queue to say something we cant let them take up all the air
Koyama Lane: tell me questions of talking points you want me to say
Avalos: repeat that it’s an uncrease. “Our parks can’t wait. Police can live within their means.” “this is 2 mil in one time money for staff they cant hire at a time when they have the highest amount of money and our parks are on the chopping block.”
Green: we get through this vote but then we really need to just vote on the rest of this shit and close this out and not say anything more. We have 20 min left and we still need to adopt this budget and adopt the prosper budget.
Novick supplies the seventh vote for the police-to-parks reroute. In next week’s paper, we’ll look at how progressive councilors spoke of their colleagues to the right—and of the most controversial bureau in the city.
