Skip to main content
The Portland City Council this week failed to find a compromise between the council’s two factions that could have saved a number of city jobs slated for elimination under Mayor Keith Wilson’s proposed budget.
The council’s progressive caucus backed a proposal on Wednesday that would’ve prevented 103 layoffs across parks, police and internal services using $16.5 million in interest accrued by the Portland Clean Energy Fund and an additional $4.5 million from other contingency funds. The proposal, backed by the labor unions representing workers slated for layoffs under Wilson’s proposed budget, died by a 6-6 vote.
A pared-down proposal from moderate Councilors Elana Pirtle-Guiney and Steve Novick proposed using $7.8 million in PCEF interest to restore cuts to the public safety support specialist program, some cuts to the fire bureau and and other cuts to administrative jobs, some of which overlapped with the restorations sought by the progressive councilors in their failed amendment. Councilor Mitch Green, who was one of the sponsors of the progressive caucus’ failed proposal to prevent layoffs, warned that he couldn’t support Pirtle-Guiney and Novick’s amendment as written. He proposed recessing the council meeting so the two factions could find a middleground overnight.
“I think it would be a dereliction of duty to Portlanders if we failed to find an opportunity for compromise that we need in this moment,” Green said. “This will fail if we don’t take a recess.”
But the council shot down Green’s request, and soon after he would vote against the amendment, alongside the majority of his colleagues. “I really wanted the time to think more about this and work on getting to a yes, but I didn’t get that opportunity,” Green said before his vote. “So I’m a no right now.”
Yet another proposal from Councilor Olivia Clark that sought to use $7.7 million from the budget of the city’s new police accountability office to restore some of the public safety cuts similarly died.
After Wednesday’s council meeting, even though relations were frayed, it appeared there would be an appetite for councilors to find a proposal that was palatable to both sides, and that would restore some of the proposed layoffs.
But come Thursday, little had been worked out.
As Thursday’s council meeting drew to a close and Pirtle-Guiney tried to introduce a new amendment that she said sought to strike a balance, Council President Jamie Dunphy said he was drawing the budget meeting to a close. Pirtle-Guiney and the other moderate councilors fought Dunphy’s decision, arguing that the council should have additional time to try and discuss a compromise proposal to avoid some the job cuts.
“I worked well into the night last night with Councilor Green…and there were negotiations throughout the morning to try and find a compromise,” Pirtle-Guiney said. “Unfortunately, a compromise could not be reached, but I think we deserve to have additional conversation in this area.”
Pirtle-Guiney added: “This was so close to a compromise, colleagues. And I think we can work it out.”
But as has happened many times before with this City Council, the discussion that following turned instead to finger-pointing.
Councilor Angelita Morillo claimed that Pirtle-Guiney did not, in fact, seek a compromise but instead “hid from us and didn’t answer any of our calls or texts” Thursday morning as the two sides sought to find a compromise. Inflamed, Pirtle-Guiney retorted back: “I had no calls or texts this morning. I was taking my child to the dentist and as soon as I heard that Councilor Green was looking for me, I called him.”
By a 6-6 vote, the council upheld Dunphy’s ruling to end deliberation of further amendments so that Pirtle-Guiney could not introduce a new amendment. By a 7-5 vote, the council subsequently voted to incorporate all of the previously approved amendments into the budget.
The budget in its current form will see its second and final reading on June 17.
