What was supposed to be a straightforward, procedural exercise at a Portland City Council meeting Monday turned into something more like a tense congressional hearing when a transportation bureau staffer was unexpectedly grilled by several councilors.
The questioning — led by District 4 Council Eric Zimmerman — appeared to have caused the Portland Bureau of Transportation staffer to break down in tears. At several moments, the woman (who I’ve chosen to not name) was clearly upset and spoke through sobs as she attempted to maintain composure while no one in the room came to her aid.
The staffer was on the agenda of the Council Finance Committee to present an ordinance that would give PBOT authority to obtain property rights needed to move forward with the NE MLK Jr Blvd Safety and Access to Transit Project. This $5 million project has been in the works since 2022 and is funded through a mix of federal and local sources. It will lead to installation of new crossing treatments with pedestrian-activated signals at several intersections along with ADA curb ramps and sidewalk upgrades.
Since this is the Finance Committee and not the Transportation Committee and the ordinance is about right-of-way procurement, I doubt the PBOT staffer — a capital projects manager with eight years of experience at the bureau — expected to be grilled about the project’s scope and its relationship to unrelated programs and policies. But Councilor Zimmerman saw this as an opportunity to criticize PBOT and grind an axe about a program he wants the agency to pay more attention to.
During his questioning, Zimmerman took several jabs at PBOT that were beyond the pay grade of the staffer he was speaking to. He wanted to know why PBOT was spending so much of this project’s budget on sidewalk and ramp repairs when (according to his opinion) the crosswalks are the most important safety feature. Zimmerman made it clear he might not approve the ordinance because, because in his view, PBOT was building “Taj Mahal” sidewalks on MLK where they already exist when some areas of his district (Southwest, West, and Sellwood) have no sidewalks at all.
“We are once again going to invest in bumping [the sidewalk] out and making it look like we did Fourth Avenue [a reference to the recently completed SW 4th Avenue project],” Zimmerman shared with the PBOT staffer. “I’ve seen no work by PBOT with respect to the SIPP program that was about where projects can exist that don’t have a sidewalk.”
Zimmerman was a co-sponsor of the Sidewalk Improvement and Paving Program, or SIPP, that passed council last year. The idea with SIPP is to create a nest egg of funds through debt financing, then identify places in the districts 1 and 4 where new sidewalks should be built. But for reasons unknown to me at this point (likely related to a budget crisis at PBOT), the program hasn’t gotten off the ground yet.
Zimmerman is clearly annoyed by the lack of progress with SIPP and he used this unrelated project ordinance — and the unsuspecting PBOT staffer — as a platform to drive his points home. “I don’t feel like SIPP has landed with PBOT yet, and I’d like to get a sense before I authorize this, because from Finance, we only have a couple of widgets to be able to exercise some influence here.”
The PBOT staffer pointed out that the MLK project comes from a federal grant awarded in 2022, but Zimmerman continued to press her about why the city is paying for new sidewalks when the crosswalks are the more important element.
“I’m not understanding the sidewalk part here,” Zimmerman said.
“When we install a signal, a signal pole, or rectangular rapid flashing beacon, we’re also required to update the ADA ramps,” the staffer replied.
“Who requires it? Because our ADA staff have presented to us some discrepancies in terms of how PBOT interprets that and what’s actually required, versus our own standard. Because I’ll remind you, SIPP is about places where there’s literally just gravel or mud, so we have no ADA standards. So I’m trying to understand how this makes common sense.”
Zimmerman kept alluding to conversations he had with PBOT Director Millicent Williams that ADA curb ramp work could be done, “in a small fashion versus in a large fashion.” “Which seems to be the PBOT way these days — we can’t do anything in a more smaller sense.” he added.
“It’s in my interest and the whole team’s interest to deliver this project as affordably as possible,” the staffer replied. “If there was a way to get out to sort of cost cut in that space, I would be doing it.”
Then Zimmerman replied,
“I am challenged by that, given my conversation with the director of PBOT, and given the situation that happened with the ADA ramp program and the replacement of certain staff members because of the, I’ll just say, approach that was used… I am looking for a way to get any acknowledgement that PBOT recognizes that they are able to make improvements without always completely tearing down and replacing, and I can’t seem to get that indication.”
Zimmerman then wondered if the MLK project was taking money from other projects he feels are more important. “I am supportive of these crosswalks,” he continued. “I’m just not sure that I have full faith and credit to the PBOT way of implementing the crosswalks… And that this is coming directly from my conversations with with the director looking at some programs in my own district, and saying, ‘Yeah, that didn’t have to be that big.’”
The councilor appeared to be somewhat self-aware, saying repeatedly that he understands Finance Committee might not be the proper venue for this exchange, but said, “I only get a few stabs at transportation-related things, being on Finance.”
Zimmerman wasn’t the only councilor with input. Committee Chair Elana Pirtle-Guiney invited North Portland resident Keith Edwards to testify. Edwards, a Black man, told the committee that he and his neighbors want more crosswalks on MLK. He implied that PBOT hasn’t been racially equitable in past crossing investments when he said, “The traffic signal recently installed on N Going Street is not predominantly used by citizens that look like me.” (N Going is a major bike route and neighborhood greenway used by many bicycle riders.) Pirtle-Guiney echoed his testimony and urged the PBOT staffer to expand the scope of the project. “We’re only making upgrades to five intersections. And I’ve heard loud and clear from Keith Edwards and from others in my district, that there’s about 20 intersections on MLK that need some work,” Pirtle-Guiney said.
Councilor Steve Novick then asked one of those questions that he knew the answer to, but just wanted the staffer to get on the record. He asked whether PBOT did outreach beyond one business association mentioned in the presentation, “And can you tells us why you felt that they were reasonable representatives of people in the community?” I think the staffer heard that question as a criticism and it was at this moment that she appeared to finally break and give into her emotions (video here).
“We’ve done a lot of outreach through the planning phase of this project,” the staffer said through sobs.
It was hard to watch as no one mentioned the condition of the staffer or took time to apologize or check in with her. Councilor Pirtle-Guiney eventually acknowledged the situation by telling the staffer they could take a minute recess if needed.
When it came time for Councilor Mitch Green to speak, he said he regretted mentioning the SIPP program earlier in the meeting, “Because I think my colleague got focused on the SIPP aspect of this and not the thing that you’re actually presenting.”
“I apologize on behalf of this committee if your if your motives were impugned today… that’s really unfair.”
– Mitch Green, councilor
“I apologize on behalf of this committee if your if your motives were impugned today,” Green continued. “I think that’s really unfair, and we just need to keep it focused on the thing that’s being presented.”
Zimmerman couldn’t let that go. “I’m not sure why we’re talking about motives being impugned here,” he responded. “Those are fair questions. There’s certainly no impugning of the project here.”
But Zimmerman’s tone and comments said otherwise. And Councilor Green wasn’t the only person who felt that way.
I heard from several readers who were concerned about how the PBOT staffer was treated. One of them shared with me in an email that,
“I thought the exchange was pretty appalling and I’m disappointed that Councilor Pirtle-Guiney didn’t intervene at all. Zimmerman’s line of questioning wasn’t really germane to the topic at hand, and given the power imbalances, was really a discussion more suitable with PBOT Director Williams. And it came off as hypocritical, given he voted against an oversight resolution last week based on concerns that it would create a culture of fear if bureau staff got grilled by councilors in a public setting.”
It was difficult to watch this exchange. I feel bad for the PBOT staffer and I’m sure it’s sent a chill through the bureau.
Beyond the choices Councilor Zimmerman made, this incident might have something to do with the new form of government where councilors no longer have direct control of specific bureaus. This means there’s no buffer between elected officials and agency staff. In years past, the commissioner-in-charge of PBOT would have taken the brunt of Zimmerman’s questions. This new power dynamic isn’t inherently bad, but as the saying goes, “With great power comes great responsibility.”
— Watch video of the committee meeting on YouTube. This link takes you to the beginning of Zimmerman’s questions.