PSU Magazine Winter 1993

RenaCusma The origins of Metro go back to the 1940s when the area's population grew explosively, and the first rumblings of regional planning began to be heard. As people poured into the area, governments and taxing districts in the tri-county area proliferated. A history of Metro by Carl Abbott and Margery Post Abbot states that between 1941 and 1951, the number of special districts increased from 28 to 89. "From 1951 to 1961, the number of districts for fire, water, zoning, sewers, parks, and lighting exploded from 89 to 218," they wrote, "helping to make Oregon seventh in the nation in the number of special districts." The question became simple: Was this patchwork, localized approach the most efficient way to deliver services to the metropolitan residents? The answer, among area leaders, was no. The first efforts to solve the problem came in the form of planning commis– sions established in the three Portland– area counties between 1950 and 1955. In 1957, the Metropolitan Planning Commission was established to look at the area in the big picture. Other agencies followed: the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Transportation Study in 1959, Portland Metropolitan Study Commission (PMSC) in 1963, the Columbia Region Association of Governments (CRAG) in 1966, the Local Govern- 16 PSU ment Boundary Commission in 1969, and the Metropolitan Service District (MSD) in 1970. The PMSC worked to turn the Portland and Multnomah County health departments into one agency, helped consolidate several east Multnomah County fire districts, and was an organizer of a four-county air pollution program. CRAG was formed to give a repre– sentative voice to the cities and coun– ties within the PMSC's authority. The Boundary Commission had authority over mergers, consolidations, annexa– tions and other planning matters in the urban area, and was formed with the help of Cease, who had directed a similar agency in Alaska. The Metropolitan Service District (MSD) rounded out the regional government menu put forth by the PMSC by providing "as many service responsibilities as the voters or the Legislature were willing to as ign," according to Abbott and Abbott. Public ambivalence about the new agency was evident from the start. In an election on May 26, 1970, voters simultaneously approved the MSD's for– mation, and rejected a tax base. This mixed message not only denied MSD a mandate, but also denied it money to work with. Its only assignment after the election-and for six years beyond– was to plan the region's solid waste disposal, and it did this mostly through state rather than local money. Metro added a second service in 1976 when Portland turned over con– trol of the Washington Park Zoo. Since the zoo draws visitors from throughout the state, it was a natural "metropolitan" service. During this period, CRAG was criticized for being unresponsive to the public. The same public complained of the fact that the MSD board members were made up of local elected officials– an arrangement that created automatic conflicts of interest. In 1976, Cease was named chair of a committee to come up with a better package. What the committee came up with was a new Metro-one that com– bined the planning functions of CRAG with the services of the MSD. The new Metro would have its own elected board members-none of whom would have any other government connec– tion-plus an elected executive. In May 1978, the ballot measure creating the new Metro was put to a vote of the people and passed by 20,000 votes. But the wording of the measure-stating that it would reor– ganize the Metropolitan Service District and abolish CRAG-gave mixed messages. The resulting vote, far from being a mandate for regional government, was equally vague. "A lot of people voting for it thought they were getting rid of all of it. They thought they were abolishing CRAG when really they were creating something bigger," says Cease, who today serves as state Senator for District 10. Bigger, yes. And in a form that separated it from other regional govern– ments in the country. The fact that Metro now had an elected board made it the only regional body in the nation that was an actual government with a direct link to the people. It was not just another bureaucratic layer. The 12 Metro councilors repre– sented districts from Forest Grove to Troutdale, and from Scappoose to Wilsonville-an area encompassing 24 cities. Each was elected to four-year terms and served on one or more of the council's five standing committees: solid waste, regional facilitie , finance, governmental affairs, and transporta– tion and planning. As a new government, it had few models. It had to feel its way along in an effort to find regional solutions to problems that, up to this point, had been local. The record has been mixed. Successes include its ability to define, plan and gain state approval for the region's Urban Growth Boundary. Metro has been praised for its ability to obtain consensus throughout the region on transportation planning. When it sited a new convention center in 1986, it was able to do so without much of the public wrangling that plagued similar efforts in Seattle, Denver, and San Francisco, according to the Abbotts' history. And it devised a solid waste disposal and recycling program that will serve the area well into the next century.