Portland's Mayor

[cneal]

I know Jed pretty well, and he's quite pro-development. He's not in favor of government-subsidized megaprojects that end up flooding the market with space that the market doesn't need. In the long run, though, that's better for the region's economy and our prospects for growth (if you want to live in an overbuilt real estate bubble city, move to Vegas or Miami).

He's also spot-on correct about the fact that job growth comes from small businesses. Economic development professionals like to say otherwise (because their salaries rely on poaching big employers from other cities), but firms with fewer than 500 employees produced virtually all of the new jobs in the state of Maine in the 2000s. (see page 38 of the "Charting Maine's Future" report: http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/rc/reports/2006/10cities/chapter2.pdf)

Often, the growth of small businesses is only evident in hindsight. Idexx started with about a dozen employees near India Street in 1983. TD Bank's US headquarters are here because Peoples Heritage Bank was a successful local business that grew throughout New England before it was acquired by Toronto Dominion.

Still, now that those businesses have reached a certain size, they're not growing as much - there are still lots of jobs at those places, but they're mostly coming from turnover, not expansion.

The NEW jobs are still coming from small and midsized businesses, because large businesses have fewer economies of scale to take advantage of in expansion. These new jobs get added one or two at a time, so you won't read newspaper articles about them. But they're what drives growth and brings new income into the region.

Lots of politicians who don't know much about running a business are prone to the mistaken belief that recruiting large corporations or factories is they key to a city's success. Jed actually has some private-sector background, which may be one reason he's not spouting that line.

I'll probably vote for Markos Miller, Jed, and Dave Marshall in my top 3. Those are the candidates who are most savvy about smart growth and new development on the peninsula.

 

[Patrick]

I know Jed pretty well, and he's quite pro-development. He's not in favor of government-subsidized megaprojects that end up flooding the market with space that the market doesn't need. In the long run, though, that's better for the region's economy and our prospects for growth (if you want to live in an overbuilt real estate bubble city, move to Vegas or Miami).

He's also spot-on correct about the fact that job growth comes from small businesses. Economic development professionals like to say otherwise (because their salaries rely on poaching big employers from other cities), but firms with fewer than 500 employees produced virtually all of the new jobs in the state of Maine in the 2000s. (see page 38 of the "Charting Maine's Future" report: http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/rc/reports/2006/10cities/chapter2.pdf)

Often, the growth of small businesses is only evident in hindsight. Idexx started with about a dozen employees near India Street in 1983. TD Bank's US headquarters are here because Peoples Heritage Bank was a successful local business that grew throughout New England before it was acquired by Toronto Dominion.

Still, now that those businesses have reached a certain size, they're not growing as much - there are still lots of jobs at those places, but they're mostly coming from turnover, not expansion.

The NEW jobs are still coming from small and midsized businesses, because large businesses have fewer economies of scale to take advantage of in expansion. These new jobs get added one or two at a time, so you won't read newspaper articles about them. But they're what drives growth and brings new income into the region.

Lots of politicians who don't know much about running a business are prone to the mistaken belief that recruiting large corporations or factories is they key to a city's success. Jed actually has some private-sector background, which may be one reason he's not spouting that line.

I'll probably vote for Markos Miller, Jed, and Dave Marshall in my top 3. Those are the candidates who are most savvy about smart growth and new development on the peninsula.

The Miami reference is getting old. China builds cities for millions (see Kangbashi) based on the concept of build it and they will come. Portland doesn't. and to say otherwise is ludicrous and contrary to the facts. Yet, despite this, Jed's website says: "The “build it and they will come” approach to attracting business does not work and must change if we hope to compete in an increasingly complex world."

Is this serious? The complex world is built on Apple, GIS and Biotech, not Hilltop Coffee.

The statement above is merely playing into the misconception that Portland is run by a bunch of greedy developers with the politicians in their back pockets. But no evidence is ever cited for this. What major building has been built recently on the 'build it and they will come' theory? For that matter, what major building has been built recently?

I'll write more later.

 

[Patrick]

The Miami reference is getting old. China builds cities for millions (see Kangbashi) based on the concept of build it and they will come. Portland doesn't. and to say otherwise is ludicrous and contrary to the facts. Yet, despite this, Jed's website says: "The “build it and they will come” approach to attracting business does not work and must change if we hope to compete in an increasingly complex world."

Is this serious? The complex world is built on Apple, GIS and Biotech, not Hilltop Coffee.

The statement above is merely playing into the misconception that Portland is run by a bunch of greedy developers with the politicians in their back pockets. But no evidence is ever cited for this. What major building has been built recently on the 'build it and they will come' theory? For that matter, what major building has been built recently?

I'll write more later.

FInishing up where I left off...

I see your point about home grown business, and please don't misinterpret my frustration (which is most certainly not stemming from local business vitality and strength, which I think does need to be supported). Instead of being anti-local business, I think the city needs to be more receptive to needs of big corporations with big jobs. I think part of our disagreement may come from a definitional problem. When I hear small business I think mom and pop, 10 or fewer employees. In reading your post more carefully a second time, however, I see you made reference to growth in companies under 500. If we are using 500 as the arbitrary delineation between big and small, I'd say we might be on the same page, saying the same thing--or close to it--in different ways. I would be all for a company of 400 people moving to town.

I just don't like how people paint Portland to be a race-to-the-bottom type of place. It is not a smoke stack chaser. In fact, when really big development is proposed here, it never materializes, largely because the City manages to either (a) not facilitate a smooth process, or (b) actually seems to go out of its way to bicker until the project goes away. I have spoken to more than one developer who says they want nothing to do with Portland because the process is too convoluted and the attitude is too anti-development.

If John Cacoulidis wants to build a 30 story building next to City Hall, for example, the politicians say he is a megalomaniac, instead of working with him to accommodate the same space in a few smaller buildings more appropriate to Portland. A 9 story building on Newbury Street was labeled a 'massive tower' in 2005. Much of the development around Portland in the past 20+ years has been in low rise small scale construction. With the exception of a few bigger projects (the biggest being Intermed), the City has not pursued a build it and they will come mentality. Rather, nothing substantial has been built, and "they" have still come. For instance, Lincoln Square was proposed in the 1980s as a major office complex to house Anthem. That project was debated and debated and never materialized in Portland. Instead, Anthem, and its jobs and tax base, moved to Scarborough.

In the late 1980s, when One City Center was built on spec, it leased at a higher rate than Faneuil Hall in Boston. It also brought in a major corporation at the same time other high rise structures were being built around town and, guess what, that year also represented a point in time when Portland had the second lowest unemployment in New England. Today, people say the working waterfront is important to our economy. I'll grant that it is a unique factor for a city to have a genuine working waterfront, and that is important to people, but it is also undeniable that fish stock have decreased to a point where fisheries are about to or already have collapsed. Most of the waterfront is devoted to parking and a failing industry. And as I just noted when the larger office buildings were built around town the city had one of the lowest unemployment rates in the country. Yet for some reason politicians who either are unaware or don't care about these facts spin things around and say corporations are bad and fishers are good. It's not a bad or good thing, its a commonsense thing. To the extent we can accommodate all types of growth, big and small, local and foreign, let's do it. But to the extent we cannot, let's focus on what's worked in the past. I should also point out that not just corporations are lured with incentives of subsidy--what about the arts district TIF? Is Rathband against subsidizing the artists that the market doesn't "need" (in the sense that it won't pay the bills in a manner sufficient to allow downtown gallery locations in many instances)?

Also, if the "build it and they will come" comment was made in reference to hotels, its more the other way around. They are coming so we'll build it. Banks do not lend to developers without a viable business venture, and if a private entity wants to finance its own project, as I understand Opechee did to a large extent with the new Hampton Inn, that's on them, not the City. That attitude will not and cannot be changed by the City. It's a private decision. Moreover, even if one agrees hotels are not the absolute greatest urban asset, isn't the Hampton better than Jordan's Meats, and out of business and dilapidated urban blight? It has a packed restaurant every night of the week and provides a convenient low cost alternative to some of the pricier boutique hotels. Moreover, it adds to the tax base, and that tax is paid by out of staters. Many large corporations, located outside of the state of Maine, represent an exportation of the tax base, i.e., it is paid by non-Mainers, because the owners all reside elsewhere. Without debating the specifics of low wages, tax incentives, etc. and the net outcome, the fact remains that the biggest economies in the world are seldom ever built on small or entirely local business. Local and small but growing business is one important part of a larger strategy, true, but larger established corporations should not be shunned, and if they desire to build larger corporate buildings they should not be labeled as having a "build it and they will come attitude." Regarding re-use, moreover (a subject I am highly in favor of when it is viable), many businesses simply don't have a need or use for the space that is currently on the market, so it isn't "flooding the market" with unnecessary space if an entity builds a new building despite a high occupancy rate. For certain large corporations, a certain floor plate size is typical of their operations, and the smaller buildings in Portland sometimes just won't do. If that was the case, I wouldn't want someone like Jed rallying against a corporation who was considering Portland merely because it wanted to build a new building. That's their choice.

Marshall and Miller are my top two, don't know about a third. I know Marshall is for a streetcar, and Miller thinks it's time to take a serious look at FBCs, which I have been saying for years, so those two should bring some good planning sense to the position.

 

[toddc]

We asked Portland's mayoral candidates:
What is Portland's greatest economic asset and what do you intend to do with it?
The responses we received by our deadline follow. They have been edited for length.
*
Michael Brennan: Over a hundred years ago my grandmother came to Portland intending to build a better life for herself. Both my parents were born in Portland and grew up on Munjoy Hill. I was born in Portland, but when I was five years old, my father lost his job and my family was forced to leave Portland in search of employment.
Portland's greatest economic asset is its people, and I want to do everything possible to make sure that no person or family has to leave Portland because they can't find a job or because there's not a place for them in our community. In many ways, this has been my goal for the more than 35 years that I have lived, worked and raised my family in Portland. I have taught students and run recreation programs for disadvantaged youth. At the United Way, I worked with the business community to negotiate multi-million dollar bond packages that addressed some of the city's most pressing issues. ...As a legislator, I increased state funding to our schools by hundreds of millions of dollars.
*
Peter Bryant: A) Location, location, location. B) Promote it. Back Cove =Beautiful. City = Clean, safe. People = Good neighbors. Program = To promote visitors. C) Program Home Base: "We're coming to Maine - Where should we go?" Portland!
Make Portland your home base. Take day trips: Old Orchard, Sebago Lake, Peaks Island, etc. Return to your hotel (home base), clean up and go out to eat. See the sights at night, shop.
*
Ralph Carmona: Portland's greatest asset involves quality-of-life economic factors that are knowledge, service-related and creative. Portland will never be a skyscraper city, but a city rooted in the arts, cuisine, tourism and assets that are natural, like its parks, waterfront and architecture. ...I would work with Portland leaders to reach out beyond Portland and engage with other Maine elected and appointed leaders to establish more positive relationships in efforts to increase support for our city and its role as an economic engine per capita that surpasses any other city or region in the country. ...And I will seek to work with the city manager, business community, senior city staff, councilors and other key stakeholders on how best to push development forward in terms of goals and action steps needed for short- (6 months to one year) and long-term (two to four years) growth.
*
Jill Duson: Portland's greatest economic assets are the people and businesses who have devoted their lives and their livelihoods to sustaining a remarkable and successful city.
As mayor, I will devote myself to supporting these assets and improving Portland's economy by jumpstarting implementation of the city's newly released "unified economic development plan." I will go full-steam ahead with the business visit and other plan activities and emphasize a "love the one you're with" approach to helping existing Portland enterprises (big and small) who have deep roots in the city's economy. I will put a priority on helping existing business survive and thrive while supporting regional and statewide efforts to attract new business and new investors to Maine.
*
John Eder: The working people of Portland make this city great: the people who pour our coffee, bag our groceries, care for the ill, paint our houses and so on, are our greatest asset. They make Portland go; they give it style and heart; they spend their money at local businesses every day; they make up a tax base.
I want to make Portland more affordable for those people working in the service industry, struggling to meet their basic needs. I want to make sure they have a stake in Portland's bright future that they have helped to build by giving them affordable housing to significantly reduce their cost of living.
*
Hamza Haadoow: I do believe that our greatest economic asset in Portland is its people; if we do not have a skilled work force, we cannot make any difference. I will empower Portland citizens to get the educational skills that our businesses need.
*
*
*
*
Jodie Lapchick: Our biggest economic asset is our creative culture and all of the architecture, unique shops, galleries, restaurants, alternative music, healing arts and alternative lifestyles that tend to come with a thriving arts community. Having the seacoast at our side is a huge bonus that makes Portland more marketable than other cities trying to capitalize on a creative economy.
The city has just completed its first-ever Economic Development Plan and Vision. I intend to ensure that the marketing and branding elements that are critical to its success are met with experienced long-term stewardship. ...Without success in the implementation of this plan, especially around the critical issues of marketing and branding, the city risks wasting untold dollars and missed opportunities for attainable economic development. This is a complicated process and requires dedication, long-term availability and commitment, as well as a thorough understanding of collaboration around marketing and branding to ensure its success.
*
David Marshall: Portland's greatest economic asset is the downtown. ... Growing our population near the downtown will benefit business. The city of Portland will encourage development of housing by changing land use codes near the downtown and incentivizing with tax increment financing and federal, state and city housing funds. ... Increasing the efficiency of our buildings will help businesses be more competitive and provide cost savings. The city of Portland will help property owners qualify for grants and financing through public and private institutions and complement these resources with a revolving loan fund.... Improving the transit system will stimulate economic development and increase property values. The city of Portland will work to develop a plan for a streetcar line or bus rapid transit connecting to the downtown, seek federal highway funds help to pay for the infrastructure and utilize Transit Oriented Development Tax Increment Financing.
*
Nick Mavodones: The asset with the most potential for growth is our waterfront. We have done a good job protecting our working waterfront while making space for non-marine businesses; however, without a slight change in priorities and the right leadership, our waterfront, both as an economic asset and a way of life, is in danger of falling into the sea.
There are two things I would do to save the waterfront and make the most of its economic potential. First, I would work with investors to restore ferry service to Nova Scotia. ...Returning ferry service will provide a significant shot in the arm for Portland's economy. Second, I will work with the state to remove burdensome regulations that force Maine groundfishing boats to tie up in Massachusetts. By simply allowing fishermen to sell in their home state a modest volume of lobster bycatch, which is inadvertently caught in their nets, we could generate $390 million in economic activity over the next 10 years.
*
Markos Miller: In the economy of the 21st century imagination, innovation and creativity are the primary commodities. Portland's creative economy extends beyond graphic designers and gallery owners, it is an approach to work; it's the idea that we have the people and the talent here in Portland to figure out a better, more efficient way to do a job and achieve results.
...The real question is not which economic asset is most important, but how do we advance an integrated vision of economic development in which each sector plays a supportive role in the economic and cultural vitality of our city. The 'creative economy' and our educational institutions serve as the fertilizer in which a diverse economy can be cultivated. ...Finally, we must ensure that Portland is an affordable and attractive place to live for both those that participate in and partake of our creative economy. Affordable housing, transportation, and recreation options, good wages, strong schools and a supportive cultural setting are critical.
*
Jed Rathband: Hands down, our ace-in-the-hole is our unparalleled quality of life. Our quality of life unlocks our ability to attract and, more importantly, retain the innovators capable of helping us create jobs in our community.
In the words of Thomas Friedman, we're not going to land a company to provide us 10,000 jobs; we're going to find 1,000 people to create 10 jobs apiece. I subscribe to this line of thinking, as I believe that Portland can't compete with the likes of Texas or California in attracting businesses that require major tax incentives to consider relocation. However, we can compete for the companies and individuals who base their business decisions on sustainability and productivity. I intend to work with our economic development agencies, both private and state, to identify the businesses capable of expanding into Maine based both on the above criteria and upon their ability to provide a relationship that is mutually beneficial to the city of Portland and themselves.
*
Ethan Strimling: The waterfront is one of Portland's greatest economic assets and it is terribly underutilized. Instead of having a waterfront that is easily accessible, diverse in its economic activity, with green space and public walkways, we have half a waterfront that is overgrown and abandoned, with piers and pylons that are crumbling throughout, and the core of our waterfront has more parking spaces than anything else.
As mayor, I will make the waterfront a focus of my work so that at the end of my term, Portland will have the kind of jewel that Baltimore, Boston and many other first-rate eastern seaboard cities brag about. A waterfront that preserves our traditional marine and working waterfront uses, and is also inviting for public interaction, and has a deeper diversity of economic activity.
*
Christopher Vail: I think we will do well to concentrate our efforts on tourism and promoting our beautiful bay, as well as our vacant land opportunity. We need to decide to be a destination and harness the Portland experience through our ports on the waterfront and at PWM. If we had a concentrated effort, would we have a developed Maine State Pier to welcome our friends from the sea? We need to generate our enthusiasm locally and reach out from there. We need a local coffee house in our airport, not a national chain. We need tours, boats and buses guiding people around our city instead of busing passengers to the mall or Freeport...
Secondly, we need to develop our barren land on Commercial Street past the Million Dollar Bridge. We have some great open land on the water that screams for marine use, fisheries, recreation, office space and professional use. We need to stop fighting over what to do and not do on our waterfront, and realize we have the acreage to do it all.
*
****this is a brief update on what some of the mayoral candidates think are portland's number one issue.....it was posted on Mainebiz.biz today......

 

[toddc]

One of the answers that i liked was Christopher Vail's answer which focused waterfront development and the undeveloped land along west commercial st, he discusses how he feels there is room to drvrlop all types, rather than fighting over whst not to develop.....dave marahall's answer was also good.....regarding downtown and how developing the downtown and its perimeter growth areas will be the future if economic vitality for the region.

 

[cneal]

I agree with just about everything you say, Patrick. I just think you're misinterpreting Jed's "build it and they will come" line, which isn't a very good one, I admit.

Knowing Jed, I can confidently say that he wouldn't turn down a large HQ if they wanted to build here. I think what he's trying to say is that the City Hall shouldn't be in the business of trying to develop real estate on spec itself - that only messes with the free market and distorts price signals for the legitimate developers who want to invest in the city (viz.: government meddling with the credit markets fueled the last decade's' credit/real estate bubble, to disastrous effects).

Instead, City Hall should be working harder to facilitate the fundamental conditions that lead to growth and development: reforming zoning codes, improving education, improving small-business financing. Leave real estate development to the experts - not to the bureaucrats.

And to elaborate on small businesses being the engines of growth, you can look up the empirical evidence yourself from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and there's not much there to argue with. Growth doesn't come from places like Hilltop Coffee (although small storefronts have generated a substantial amount of job and business growth on the peninsula) - it's going to be places like VIA, which started with 2 people in the 1990s and now has nearly 100 (and also just got named the Best Small Firm in the nation by Advertising Age magazine). Or Stone Coast fund management, which has tripled its workforce in three years. Or Tap Tapas, the three-man app development firm with a cheap office in the State Theater building. Dozens of other cities are competing with each other to land a big biotech firm - it's a lot of work with a low probability of success to try to go after those businesses. The smart money's on cultivating smaller, successful homegrown firms, because those are the businesses that know local market conditions and the local workforce, have the largest capacity to grow, and can take full advantage of Portland's unique positions.

 

[Patrick]

Thank you for elaborating. I can't say i disagree with you or find anything objectionable about the logical way in which you presented the issues in your previous post. And isee your point. Its just that i hear people mis-state the facts a lot with respect to the city's growth, and i'd be disapppinted if one of them were elected mayor. Sounds like jed perhaps is trying to collect the vote of those people at least, or perhaps just chose a poor way to communicate his stance. Im not saying i habe all the answers, but i like to think i know when i see someone who makes sense, and that line was just so contrary toreality that it made me wonder. Id like to see marshall or miller in the seat.

 

[Patrick]

Some really good discussions from the mayoral candidates. I thought the responses from eder, brennan and duson were cop puts though. Many people in portland or indeed any city are transient--they dont necessarilu stay here. Threfoe to say the city's greatest asset is its people is to say there is nothing tied to this "place" that makes it special--which is baloney. Its like the people in interviews who say their biggest weakness is being a perfectionist--which is a calculated answer to get the job just as he answers above were calculated to get votes. Anyone agree? (ps am on a phone so pardon grammar and spelljng)

 

[FrankLloydMike]

Not sure if anyone has seen this yet, but the Portland Society of Architects has posted mayoral candidates' answers to questions relating to the city's built environment. Pretty interesting and informative.

 

[Corey]

Not sure if anyone has seen this yet, but the Portland Society of Architects has posted mayoral candidates' answers to questions relating to the city's built environment. Pretty interesting and informative.

Thanks for sharing those, they are really interesting to read and the questions are the type that us archboston folk are interested in hearing the answers to.

 

[Patrick]

Thanks for sharing those, they are really interesting to read and the questions are the type that us archboston folk are interested in hearing the answers to.

Funny you should notice that, as I suggested the first question on those lists! Ha!

 

[Corey]

Funny you should notice that, as I suggested the first question on those lists! Ha!

Nice! Whose responses do you agree with the most? I haven't read each candidate's, but I glanced over about half of the them. I think Marshall has some great responses. If nothing else, the depth of his answers seems to be a plus.

 

[Patrick]

Nice! Whose responses do you agree with the most? I haven't read each candidate's, but I glanced over about half of the them. I think Marshall has some great responses. If nothing else, the depth of his answers seems to be a plus.

The thing about Marshall is that he both has great ideas and great ideas about great ideas. That is to say, he says we should have more arts downtown, and then has an idea about how to get them there. He says we should have a streetcar, and proposes ways to fund it. He differentiates between spending and investing. He doesn't propose pie in the sky ideas without thinking about how--or if--they can be implemented. There is a need for visionary thinkers, and there is a need for those who know how to implement their ideas. It is rare indeed to get someone who approximates both "types" of people. That's what I like about Marshall--especially because I agree with his ideas. Even if you don't like his ideas, you would have to admire his ability to discuss how ideas of any sort get implemented---some people forget the importance of that step.

 

[Corey]

The "unofficial final results" of the mayoral race should be revealed in about 30 minutes I hear. The official results will be released tomorrow. I think everyone is pretty confident that Brennan will be the winner.

The Bangor Daily News and the Forecaster have had some great coverage of this year's election. I wasn't expecting much from the Press Herald but they still let me down a little.

Edit - As of 8:16pm Brennan is the unofficial winner. Should be officially confirmed and verified sometime tomorrow.

 

[Patrick]

I just noticed this on Brennan's website:

"Local Economy
I will help create a prosperous economy and quality jobs that are green, innovative and knowledge-based. He will support local businesses and build on our strengths, including a healthy working waterfront"

Anyone else catch this....?

 

[FrankLloydMike]

So what do people make of the mayoral result? I know very little about only a few of the candidates, and nothing about the winner.

Also, was this a winner-take-all race with more than two candidates? Was there no run-off or primary?

 

[Patrick]

Brennan is Portland's mayor. Don't know what I think about it, but I know his campaign website said so much that it said very little. Being too inclusive of ideas means nothing will get done. Appealing to everyone means appealing to no one, because people's desires and needs differ so greatly. I don't know if that's how he'll be as mayor, but it seems like it may be. We'll see and I wish him luck. Disappointing that Marshall or Miller didn't get elected (the two candidates REALLY into urban planning). In the city I work currently, a transportation planner was just elected mayor and we are beginning to discuss some interesting urbanist zoning reform (preliminary stages only). Political leadership is key for urban reform (Manchester highlights this particularly well).

 

[Corey]

There will be a public inauguration ceremony on Monday, Dec. 5th at Ocean Gateway for our new mayor. Starts at 6pm. More details here. I might be able to stop by for a bit. I haven't been inside the terminal for a while now. If you haven't seen it in person, it would be worth attending this just to see this fine semi-public space for yourself.

 

[Corey]

Surprised I didn't run into anybody from here at the inauguration this evening. It was my first time seeing Michael Brennan in person and I enjoyed his inaugural address. His experience with politics shines through and he is a very good public speaker, which is a good thing to have in a mayor. Some snapshots:

Overly dramatic black and white plus fake lens flare: