Commissioner Sharon Meieran

Multnomah County’s Office of Homeless Services recently tried to respond to ongoing criticism of its lack of progress on homelessness by releasing new numbers that sound too good to be true.

That’s because they are.

The County claims that, thanks to their well organized efforts, nearly 5500 people moved into homes and almost 7900 moved into shelters this past fiscal year. Those numbers do sound good. Unfortunately they are untethered to the reality of what they supposedly represent.

The County relies on people not reading the disclaimers in their own marketing materials in order to sell their version of the truth. But if you read the small print you see that the County is not tracking real outcomes for real people. The numbers don’t say where people come from, how long they’ve been in shelter, or where they go the day, week or month after being sheltered. Most critically, none of the numbers describe the single piece of information we need to determine if the County’s approaches are actually working: The total number of people living outside.

The only number that can truly tell us whether we’re making a difference in unsheltered homelessness is (it’s embarrassing that I even need to say this): How many people are living unsheltered. If that number goes up, then we are doing worse. If the number goes down, then we are doing better.

Rather than just counting the number of people living on our streets - something I’ve been calling for for years and County leadership could have completed many times over at this point- they have consistently deflected the question.

They say they this number is impossible to know or track because too many factors are “outside of their control” (their words, not mine). So, instead, they cite numbers that look good but tell us nothing. Just like the “Fentanyl Emergency Declaration” told us nothing about what was happening around the Fentanyl crisis and “Deflection Center” press releases tell us nothing about deflection.

When the County says, “7900 people moved into shelter,” it makes one think that there will be 7900 fewer people living on the street. But “7900 people moved into shelter” could mean that 7900 people got respite in a shelter bed and ended up back on the street the next day; that 7900 people got into shelter and then died; that 2000 people got housing and treatment for their addiction and 5900 ended up back on the streets; or that 400 people got into housing then set their apartment on fire.

The reality is, regardless of how many people “move into shelter”, we don’t know what happens to them. And by the County’s own reports, up to 87% of people moving into shelters end up not getting placed into housing.

And even for the small minority who do get housing, like the person OPB found for their article, Multnomah County might pay their rent for a year, but doesn't follow them to know what happens to them after this one year. We’ve all read the stories about people getting services or rent for a year, and then the rug gets pulled out from under them, and they end up back where they started. This isn’t success; it’s playing with people’s lives.

The only way to know how we’re doing in terms of decreasing the number of people living outside is by counting them. We should create a true By Name List to establish a baseline of how many people are living unsheltered on our streets, who they are, and what they need (this is very different from the County's inaccurate and incomplete list, by the way). I suspect that County leadership reacts allergically to this request because they are afraid it will expose how woefully inaccurate our numbers and how woefully inadequate our services have been.

But only when the number of people living on our streets goes down, and the people on our accurate and complete By Name List list can be followed through shelter and treatment to successful and sustained placement in housing, will we be able to claim success. Until then, the kinds of numbers the County has been trumpeting as success and using to justify spending hundreds of millions of dollars are, at best, irrelevant.

I wish that instead of simply reporting what the County says it’s doing, reporters would take the time to understand and truth-check the numbers. Because the County’s marketing campaign is only perpetuating the mediocrity and failure of our system. The truth behind the numbers is the real story for those of us who honestly want to help people experiencing homelessness get off the streets for good.

The Office of Homeless Services will present its full year-end report at the public Board briefing next Tuesday, September 10, at 10am. I encourage you to tune in.

Multnomah County reports surge in people moving from homelessness to shelter, housing in past year More people moved into shelter and permanent housing in Multnomah County through the region’s homeless service agency in the past 12 months than in recent history.

Here are the essentials from my comments to the Board on Thursday regarding my Resolution to pause opening of the Multnomah County deflection center due to safety issues:

I brought a Resolution forward to pause opening of the deflection center because the Chair had proposed a deflection plan that involved building a structure that was never required, and then rushed to get it done on a timeline that was never required, with all decisions being made by the Chair in consultation with a “leadership team” that met behind closed doors and never issued a final report.

Neither the Board nor the community being impacted were engaged. A building was leased without notifying the Board, at a cost of $2 million for refurbishing, that will be demolished in a couple of years to build a 274-unit apartment building with family units and affordable housing units, and that happened to be right by a preschool. And still neither the Board nor neighbors were engaged.

And then “information” started coming out about the program that was being developed: There were vague descriptions of three “phases” and different “iterations” of a plan. But minimal information about permitting that classified a sobering center housing people who are intoxicated as a business use. About the level of intoxication of people being brought to the center. About drop-off that does not require people being brought to the center to be served. About what "referrals" actually mean given we have few detox, treatment and shelters available to refer people to and people who are houseless and intoxicated are not well-positioned to follow up with referrals. About transportation away from the facility that is not actually required. About safety inside the building, around the building, and for a reasonable perimeter, that would ensure predictable negative impacts were mitigated, especially for the preschool located a few hundred feet away. And critically important - about how people would actually be served and what the measures of success would be.

During the entire process, as I and others called for a pause to get real information and get questions meaningfully answered instead of deflected, the Chair voiced no intention of delaying the opening of the center. In fac, she doubled down on the timeline, implying that it was required by the Legislature, that the center was desperately needed even though the same services could be provided in other ways that were as effective, and that law enforcement was urgently asking that this specific center be opened. None of these were accurate.

As neighbors became more concerned about the looming deadline with no prospect of a safety plan around the facility, the Chair highlighted a Good Neighbor Agreement “framework” that would be put in place as of September 1, suggesting it was a collaborative effort with neighbors when in fact neighbors had no input whatsoever. Legal action was threatened by the nearby preschool if opening was pursued as planned. The local business community sought to partner and was rebuffed.

And still the Chair and the deflection team pushed for the September 1 opening date, while meanwhile the Chair, the County’s Chief Operating Officer and the Health Department Director - the key decision-makers - were all on vacation just weeks before the center was scheduled to open.

I proposed a Resolution to delay opening of the deflection center because the Chair’s plan was ridiculous. It was neither safe nor, to the extent there was an actual plan, feasible.

Only after I submitted my resolution did the Chair begin to waver on the timeline of opening. And only on Monday the week my Resolution was to be publicly heard did the Chair notify the Board by email (after notifying the Press) that she was going to implement a pause and implement the alternative deflection plan I suggested during the interim.

Although the process of secrecy and sudden issuance of a press release was sadly typical, this 180-degree change was a welcome capitulation by the Chair in the face of my Resolution and the voices of the community. It was exactly the outcome we had sought.

I could have withdrawn my Resolution after this victory, but I kept it on the Board agenda because Board hearings are about more than simply a vote. They are the few opportunities for the public’s concerns to be elevated and community members’ voices to be heard.

This kind of transparency of process is essential to a functional democracy, and the voice of the public has been stifled here. Even with a purported opportunity for “public comment” at Board meetings it has become apparent that the process is a misnomer. The Chair has placed strict limits on opportunities for public comment, and the process for testifying is so challenging that many community members are functionally excluded.

So more than just accomplishing the goal of delaying the opening of the deflection center due to concerns around safety and process, my Resolution sought to elevate the voices of those who have felt unheard. I hope the Chair has taken the comments made during the hearing to heart. And since she is making all the final decisions here, I hope this delay gives her an opportunity to engage meaningfully with community, speak directly with experts on addiction outside the County and the small circle of people usually engaged by her office, and make some better decisions.

Although the Resolution itself did not pass in a 2-2 vote (thank you Julia Brim-Edwards, Multnomah County Commissioner - District 3 for your support!) it accomplished its actual goals: Delaying the opening of the deflection center and putting the public back in public safety, public service, and public process.

Thank you to all those who testified, tried to testify, called, emailed, and voiced a desire to do things right, especially the Buckman Community Association, Central Eastside Central Eastside Together, and the Escuela Viva Community School. Who care both about the people being served in the center and about keeping their neighborhood safe. These issues are not in conflict, in fact they are inextricably linked. Here's to a pause that allows enough time to do deflection safely and do deflection right.

Multnomah County Commissioner Seeks Pause in Deflection Center Project Multnomah County Commissioner Sharon Meieran is seeking to pause plans for a $2 million drug deflection center in inner Southeast Portland, saying that too many questions remain about security at the facility and what services will be offered there.The deflection center is scheduled to open at 900 S...

After reading the Portland Tribune this weekend, I was deeply disturbed to learn that the proposed County deflection center rests on even shakier ground than I thought possible. The issue appears not to stem, as I had thought, from the complete lack of a plan, but rather from an explicit effort to market a lie.

Architect and City Council candidate Ben Hufford wrote an op-ed, “Multnomah County's self-deflected financial wounds”, about the County’s subversion of Portland City building requirements and clear attempts to evade questions of site suitability. As a County Commissioner I find it egregious that these issues were not presented and aired before the full Board prior to voting to spend $2 million on what amounts to little more than a marketing scam. We should have been hearing about these issues in advance from County leadership, not from a City Council candidate.

Here is what it appears we now know:

1. The proposed site for the county’s new sobering center cannot be used for detox under city code.
2. If its use is changed for almost anything other than as a business office, it will trigger the need for a costly and complete seismic upgrade.
3. The building in question right now has an outstanding permit for demolition to make room for a 274 unit affordable housing complex.
4. The County’s response to all of this is that the intent is only for temporary use, despite their plan calling for sobering and detox.
5. These revelations all pertain to permitting, but raise even more questions about zoning, which also has not been raised or addressed publicly.

To summarize: The County is spending $2 million for a building due to be torn down that can apparently never be used for its stated purpose. It now appears the only thing Multnomah County is likely to successfully deflect in the Buckman neighborhood is affordable housing.

I suspect none of this is news to County leadership, but all of it is news to me, the Buckman Community Association, and the general public. The County Board had a presentation two weeks ago in which none of these pertinent facts were shared. The outcome of that charade was three Board members (Julia Brim-Edwards, Multnomah County Commissioner - District 3 and I stood in opposition) committing the County to spend $2 million on something it has absolutely no ability to deliver.

Despite my experience with the County's dysfunction, I find it hard to believe that this site would be approved under normal circumstances. I strongly suspect that County leadership views the momentum behind creating a 24 hour sobering center as a frustrating inconvenience and intends to deflect by using the $25 million the legislature gave the County to create a misleading mirage instead of building the permanent sobering and deflection center we actually need.

Given the degree of obfuscation and culpability on the part of County leadership, I have no faith that demanding these issues be addressed before the Board will get anywhere. I hope reporters will investigate the facts presented above in order to make the public aware of what the County seems so clearly intent on covering up.

OPINION: MultCo is creating 'self-deflected' financial wounds The rush to open a Multnomah County Deflection Center in the wake of the Legislature’s repeal of Measure 110 has already raised serious questions about the ability of county leadership

Over a year late the Chair answers Multnomah County, Oregon’s 911 call. It’s about damn time.

Thanks to the first responders who have gone above and beyond trying to fix this problem and save lives despite the County’s failure to act, and to the champions throughout the County who have continued to push for change. Shout outs to Portland Fire & Rescue City of Portland, OR Fairview, Oregon City of Wood Village, OR Gresham, Oregon Gresham Fire City of Troutdale Portland City Commissioner Rene Gonzalez and Julia Brim-Edwards, Multnomah County Commissioner - District 3 and Deputy City Administrator Mike Myers!

Multnomah County Reaches Agreement With Ambulance Provider Multnomah County says it has reached an agreement with American Medical Response, ending four months of mediation aimed at improving ambulance response times.As part of the yearlong deal, the county agreed to allow advanced-care ambulances to be staffed by one paramedic and one less-trained emergenc...

A year and a half later…

Today’s news is distressing, even by Portland standards.

It appears the Portland Mayor and Multco Chair didn’t figure out how to avoid the Multco Sheriff refusing to book for violation of city ordinances. If there was such a thing as “gross government negligence” this would be the poster child. It’s one thing to try to prevent chaos on the streets, it’s another to see chaos emanating directly from our local government.

Within weeks after celebrating their “unprecedented collaboration”around a homelessness plan, we learn that the County didn’t coordinate with the City around enforcement of its ordinance relating to homelessness. Honestly, what were they thinking? It’s not like these ordinances have been back page news. They've been in the headlines and were the subject of a recent SCOTUS case. They’ve been front and center in Portland, though both the Chair and Mayor have deflected questions.

I strongly encourage the Chair and Mayor to get together and figure this out. I can’t imagine I’ll be alone in demanding answers. Leaders are supposed to lead, not just issue meaningless press releases and then deflect responsibility when reality interferes.

Sheriff’s Office Declines to Book First Person Arrested by Portland Police for Violating City’s Camping Rules Last Friday morning, the Portland Police Bureau made its first arrest under the city’s new time, place and manner rules, which restrict camping in public rights of way. Officers arrested a man in Northeast Portland who allegedly refused repeated offers of a shelter bed or stay at a tiny home.But w...

The Chair’s update on HB4002 still has no specifics and no additional questions are answered, but they’re certainly honing the buzzwords and the marketing. In case you’re not familiar with the terms I’ll translate: “Deflection” means “avoidance of responsibility”; “iterative process” means “we don’t know; and “phased approach” means “we’ll make it up as we go along”.

The problem with this non-plan conceived behind closed doors isn’t only that we’re spending real money and wasting real time, but most importantly real people won’t be helped, and will in fact be harmed. Because the elephant in the room is that we don’t have treatment, shelter or services to deflect people TO. And without those, the whole idea of a deflection center is a cruel, expensive joke.

A facility is NOT required by Sept 1 despite the double-speak we keep hearing. And amidst all the basic questions the Chair can’t answer, the most glaring is this: What is the value add of a temporary deflection facility? Because from what I can tell, there isn’t one. There are cheaper alternatives that would be as or more effective and cause less harm.

We need to urgently put our time, money and energy into building the real sobering center and system we need to truly help people on their path to recovery and stop deflecting our attention with the latest phased iterative marketing ploy.

https://www.koin.com/local/multnomah-county/neighbors-frustrated-by-multco-s-vague-deflection-center-plans/amp/

As I've already posted, the Multnomah County Board voted to adopt the County's $3.9 billion budget 4-1 and I, sadly but not surprisingly, was the lone "no" vote.

During the process, I offered and supported a number of budget amendments that could have built accountability, transparency, effectiveness, and efficiency into our system. These included a Fentanyl emergency response task force; a three-month temporary pilot to implement and evaluate ambulance staffing changes that would decrease response times, prevent harm, and get people to ERs urgently; dedicated outreach teams to gather reliable, complete information about people living unsheltered so we can finally know exactly what we need to do to get them housed. These were rejected by a majority of the Board, including the Chair. (A huge thank you to Julia Brim-Edwards, Multnomah County Commissioner - District 3, who supported all my proposals, spoke eloquently about the need for a true fentanyl response, and offered her own amendments bolstering accountability of the County and supporting public safety).

I didn't intend to post again so soon, but today I've watched as the Chair has tried to spin her failure to support my amendments into blame. Suggesting that somehow it's my fault my amendments didn't pass. I want to nip this lie in the bud.

I participated fully in every process, met every deadline, had my proposals considered like all other proposals, and had them voted on like every other Commissioner. One doesn't need months to consider whether to create a fentanyl emergency response task force, especially when we're drowning in money and have a track record of not being able to spend it by tens of millions of dollars. The Chair voted against that proposal and others that were common sense and that we could afford. Her choices were her own, and it's offensive that she would try to place blame on anyone but herself.

Okay, that's it for now. I just had to respond to what I watched unfold today.

Multnomah County, Oregon passed its FY 2025 budget today with a 4-1 vote. Bet you'll never guess who the "1" was...

Okay, you probably guessed. As the lone NO vote, cast with love for my community, belief in the potential of our County, and effort to move the County into action, here are my talking points:

After all I’ve been saying and doing the past few years, it should be no surprise that I begin today by observing that Multnomah County is badly flailing without a plan. The budget approved by this board is proof that once again we have failed to make the fundamental choices necessary to drive change or to measure the results of our ever-increasing investments.

Given the absence of an actual plan, the budget should be the closest thing we have to a clear mapping of priorities. But far from establishing focus, this budget obscures it.

It hides investments of hundreds of millions of dollars beneath a bunch of mediocre rhetoric and buzzwords. It contains hundreds of pages, each describing another program that doesn’t tie into a larger purpose, plan or vision.

So-called “performance indicators” do not correlate in any way with actual performance, so we can’t learn over time whether we’re investing in a way that tells us if what we’re doing works, or how we might achieve better results. There is no data to tell us where we’ve been or to shine a light on where we are going, so next year we won’t know if we got anywhere.

Of course that assumes anyone in county leadership is responsible for following up to see if we did or didn’t do what we said. Each year it’s like a brand new game of charades, and the public - especially those who are most vulnerable, marginalized and disenfranchised- lose.

The real tragedy is that our actions – or rather, inactions – impact real human beings every day. PLANS are supposed to come before budgets. And no credible plan has ever been presented to this board by county leadership. For any of the core work of the county in mental health, addictions, corrections, public health, or housing.

Politically, this is a game. Morally, it’s shameful.

I’ve been forced to concede that business at the county is not about smart plans or policies. Unfortunately, at the county, the concept of leadership itself is threatening to those more dedicated to avoiding blame instead of making a difference.

This is the final budget in my 8 years of service. I’m leaving with a degree of sadness and outrage I never would have thought possible when I first ran for office. Because when I started I naively thought failure would be a matter of not having enough funding to reach our goals and help those most vulnerable.

But the truth is much more pernicious.

I’ve realized that we’re swimming - or more accurately, drowning - in money. We have more money In Multnomah County than we can effectively waste, and given our history of wasting resources, that’s a helluva indictment.

What’s worse are the excuses I hear. The wallowing in a mixture of arrogance and self-pity as we tell ourselves that we of course can’t do better until we solve the social issues of our times. That it’s other jurisdictions’ fault. That we somehow STILL don’t have enough money.

That’s all bu****it. If we actually planned in advance what we should do with hundreds of millions of dollars per year dedicated to street homelessness - we could have transformed this community, and saved countless lives already. The people who sent us here, and the people struggling on the street right now ALL deserve so much better!

What I see in this sad excuse for a budget are the missed opportunities that should plague ALL of us as we go to bed tonight with a roof over our heads.

If this budget is not a prism from which we can see progress, it should at least be a mirror through which we see failure.

I want to say directly to all the service providers and volunteers out there doing the front line work every day - this budget represents the failure of the county as a government, not the failure of the people the county employs. There are an incredible number of people out there even as I speak dedicated to helping others and they are amazing human beings. They are being failed by their leadership who does not seem to understand that we have an obligation to outline and implement a coherent plan, not to try to obscure accountability and hide failure.

After eight years, in the end I can only say this: I regret only that I have but one NO vote to give to my county.

For those who watched the press conference by Chair Vega Pederson and are still wondering what happened as a result of the 90-day fentanyl emergency declaration, the end results seem to boil down to:

1. City, county, and state governments collaborated;

2. A dashboard was created;

3. A pilot program was funded;

4. Multnomah County launched a billboard campaign; and

5. A few blocks of central Portland were cleared of open drug use.

Here’s my translation:

1. Local and state governments collaborated, which should be a given, not a goal;

2. A dashboard was created, though it is incomplete and confusing;

3. A pilot program was celebrated that in fact existed before the emergency was declared and failed to measure outcomes;

4. A billboard campaign was launched proclaiming, “Recovery is possible!” when there are few places available for detox and treatment, even fewer places for people to go once treated, and people are dying from overdose in record numbers;

5. A few people were shuffled from Portland’s Central core to the steps of the Central Library.

The results seem trivial given the enormity of the crisis we are facing and the fanfare with which the fentanyl emergency was rolled out. All of them could have and should have been achieved years sooner. And none required the use of emergency powers.

This was more of a PR stunt than a crisis response. We started with no plan and, three months later, ended with no plan. The real tragedy is that, as Multnomah County leaders declare “Mission Accomplished!” from the 90-day emergency declaration, real people continue to suffer and die on our streets. We’ve only wasted more time and resources that they don’t have.

I do not make an endorsement for my successor as the Commissioner serving the people of Multnomah County District 1 lightly. I appreciate the candidates who have stepped up to run for the seat and I respect and admire Meghan Moyer and Kevin Fitts.

But having spent seven years on the County Commission fighting for a comprehensive plan to tackle our homelessness crisis, I support Vadim Mozyrsky for Multnomah County because I know that he will carry out that vision.

Vadim’s personal experience - as a Ukrainian refugee who put himself through law school and became an administrative law judge and civic leader - will bring a unique and invaluable voice to a County that has lost its way.

With deaths from overdose escalating and a mental health system in disarray, DIstrict 1 needs a leader who will not accept the downward spiral of the status quo. Vadim Mozyrsky is a leader who will engage in critical thinking rather than groupthink; who will push back on policies that cause, rather than reduce, harm; who will ask the deeper questions even when they’re uncomfortable; and who will always do what’s right for the people of Multnomah County.

Vadim has earned my trust and my confidence. I hope you will join me in supporting him as my successor as the County Commissioner representing District 1.

A depressing day at the County. The following is a sumamry of our Board briefing. I apologize for the length, but feel the need to express.

At our briefing today the Board was updated on two major topics: (1) the 90-day fentanyl emergency and (2) implementation of the SHS Measure. Sady, but not surprisingly, we didn’t have time to meaningfully discuss either.

1. The 90-day fentanyl emergency (aka, “Nothing New”):

Apparently we’re on Day 75 of the 90-day fentanyl emergency and it's still not clear to me what the goal is or what has been accomplished. The incident command team is apparently working on recommendations for when the 90 days expire, but no meaningful information about this was shared with the Board.

Our update centered around a small pilot project between the Mental Health & Addiction Association of Oregon and Portland Police Bureau Bike Squad connecting people using fentanyl to detox. I appreciate this partnership and the excellent work of these groups. However I was dismayed that the County failed to track what happened to the few people lucky enough to get services. Given the lack of places for people to go after detox and treatment, they were likely discharged back to homelessness. This is tragic, causes needless suffering, erodes trust, and wastes resources. Note to County and incident command: Track these things!

At the end of the briefing I was left with questions which the Chair did not allow to be answered because of time constraints: What did suspending procurement rules add to our emergency response? What was done during the 90 days that couldn’t have been done at any time over the last couple of years? What is the plan for anywhere outside of the central city? What can actually be accomplished if there aren’t places to send people for detox or treatment, or places for them to go when they’re discharged?

Meanwhile, fentanyl and other dangerous drugs are still dirt cheap, openly consumed and trafficked, and widely available in our community. This is never addressed in our updates.

2. Update on Supportive Housing Services Measure Revenue by the Joint Office of Homeless Services (aka “Fuzzy Math: A Game of Smoke and Mirrors”):

Our second presentation started with a graph showing Multnomah County’s revenue from the SHS measure as a combination of unspent funds, program investments, and unanticipated revenue totalling $205 million (yes, $205 MILLION). A second graph showed a different breakdown of the funds, calling them something different and making them sound better. Then there was an explanation of why it was okay to budget for spending only 75% of the funds, AFTER contingency, reserves, and capital outlay were subtracted. So the JOHS spending $91 million of the total $205 million of SHS funds available was not only okay, but in fact something to be celebrated!

It’s like a game of smoke and mirrors. The County calls it one thing, it looks bad, they call it something else, use some fuzzy math, and p**f - suddenly it’s fine. It would be entertaining if it wasn’t so misleading and damaging.

Meanwhile, the complete lack of ANY investments in addiction or mental health services, when this is one of the greatest needs we are facing, was shocking. (See previous briefing subject: 90-day fentanyl crisis and severe lack of recovery housing). I expressed frustration and outrage over what the County is doing - or not doing - with hundreds of millions of dollars available in SHS funds, noting that I have the luxury of being frustrated and outraged then going home and sleeping in my comfortable bed. Real people are suffering and dying every day as a result of the County’s poor planning and failure to act. We act like things are okay, and they’re simply NOT.

Finally, I emphasized that we need to be able to follow the money. I asked my colleagues on the Board to join me in demanding a deep forensic and performance based audit of the County’s use of SHS funds, and also all funds of the JOHS. I ask anyone who agrees to contact the Chair and all the County Commissioners. Your voice matters!

3. Metro Presentation on SHS Regional Annual Report (aka “Fuzzy Words: What Did I Actually Vote For and Why Isn’t It Happening?”):

This overview reiterated goals of the SHS measure, with vague language describing placement for a couple of thousand people who were experiencing homelessness, and stabilization for 10,000 people who were housed. I mentioned that this didn’t seem to match what I thought I voted for, which was deep services and supports for people with serious disabilities experiencing long term homelessness, allowing them to become housed and retain their housing. In particular, I had thought major investments would be made in mental health and addiction support for people living outside, most of whom experience serious mental illness and/or addiction regardless of how they became homeless, and who are dying at record levels from overdose.

I voted for Multnomah County’s Local Implementation Plan (LIP) only because behavioral health was finally included in the plan after a huge amount of advocacy, and I was assured that local data and metrics would be adopted that would allow for meaningful assessment of progress. Neither of these happened, and if I knew then what I know now, I would not have supported the LIP.
Metro made a number of recommendations as to how Multnomah County could improve its performance in relation to the SHS measure, including around communication and engagement, financial and data transparency and accountability, workforce capacity, administrative burdens, and outreach. I agreed,while appreciating my colleague Commissioner Brim Edwards’s comment that improving communication can’t actually change reality. Our work should be about doing better, not communicating better.

I asked a question about the fuzzy math and lack of context around the County’s report of a 98% success rate in permanent supportive housing placement and retention, but the Chair cut off the dialogue due to time constraints.

Final comment: This cutting off of dialogue is not okay. I expressed that Board meetings are commissioners’ only opportunities to ask questions and engage publicly around pressing issues. Adequate timing can be anticipated and planned for, and this falls squarely within the purview of the Chair. Shutting down public dialogue is not the answer and does a disservice to our community. I believe we should be meeting more often and/or for longer so that we can fully and transparently discuss the issues impacting our communities, especially when we are facing so many crises.

To those who got to this point: Thanks for reading!