Beggars can't be choosers – except in Portlandia

“I agree that we should have safe places for people to go to, but not big tent cities,” said Christopher Brown, who lived under the Tilikum Crossing last year.

He was one of many speakers who said a ban on camping would hurt people.

“It’s going to lump our mentally ill with our quiet (residents),” said Brown. “We have to understand that not everyone on the streets is the same.”... 

Becky Lange said large camps run by the government is a terrible idea.

“I mean three camps of 500 people! An internment camp is a group where you put people who have not committed a crime, but they’re a member of a group that’s found distasteful or unwanted,” Lange said. “Sounds like what you’re doing here.”...

The meeting was hosted by many of the nonprofits that work with unhoused people including AfroVillage PDX, Blanchet House, Gather: Make: Shelter, Ground Score Association, Hygiene4All, JOIN and numerous others....

Portland is at a crossroads. Will it do the right thing and take radical action over the bleats of the people contributing to, and profiting off, the problems? I wouldn't bet on it.


  1. Charlie Hales did say ok to camping from his armchair in Clark county…
    …well played?

    No one ran against him except the outright other tax dodger Sho, who people found distasteful on those grounds, and fair enough, but at least he ran a business and had to work/live in SW Portland at the time, so maybe he was more plugged in to the pulse / use-value oriented and wasn’t as addicted to the SZ developer/foreign money laundering & had to live here?

    1. Or am I a cycle off on that?

    2. Then again, dangerous to assume, maybe you call hypothetical mayor Sho and he just insures his ‘on the rocks’ restaurant business in covid for 8x its value and lets it burn LMAO/ jokes still on us?

    3. To remedy the situation (that is to say the flak he got for being in his comfy Clark Co. residency arm chair), Charlie purchased a house in eastmoreland.

      ‘What’s the most walkable neighborhood within city limits farthest from the problems where the houses hide their wealth/size behind a tutor revival facade & street / front yard trees / similar with no porch/shared space for most of them w/~800k/1mi buy in, no rental units, & no corner duplexes &/or lofts/crapterpartments that me and my buddies build?’

    4. “Well played”

  2. We owe these people on the street absolutely nothing. If they are truly disabled, or are elderly, well then that is the exception. Unless they are committed to becoming productive citizens, there should not be any more money thrown at them.

    Let the ones who are committed to getting clean and to learning some kind of work skills be isolated in an offsite institution somewhere and give them the necessary shelter, counseling, and training. The others need to be given no more opportunity to wreck the city and either chased off or institutionalized somewhere. At this point that is the only option available.

  3. Maybe the ADA lawsuit will prevail, and the city won't have a choice. No matter how much compassion we have for people living on the streets (sidewalks, rather), you cannot have a functioning city when so many people can't or won't follow the most basic rules of being part of society.


Post a Comment

The platform used for this blog is awfully wonky when it comes to comments. It may work for you, it may not. It's a Google thing, and beyond my control. Apologies if you can't get through. You can email me a comment at, and if it's appropriate, I can post it here for you.