‘Our youth can't wait': Portland City Council approves $65 million in Children's Levy grants
PORTLAND, Ore. () – Portland City Councilors unanimously passed an emergency ordinance to approve funding recommendations for millions in Portland Children's Levy grants after rejecting them earlier this month.
On June 4, councilors voted 7-5 to reject the Portland Children's Levy's nearly $65 million in grant requests. Then councilors passed an emergency ordinance to extend all current grants for a year, even to groups that the PCL Allocation Committee had decided not to recommend for funding.
Oregon's minimum wage set to increase
Councilor Steve Novick was one of the five who voted against rejecting the requests. On Wednesday, he introduced an ordinance to revoke the extension and go back to pass the recommended grants. He called the Children's Levy citizen involvement on steroids.
'Dozens of volunteers going through an elaborate process to come up with recommendations,' he said. 'And I would like anybody who votes against returning the recommendations of those advisory committees and of the staff to say nothing about citizen involvement in the future.'
Since the ordinance was added to the agenda on Wednesday, that opened the door for public testimony. Many, like Triple Threat Mentoring Founder and CEO Nike Greene, jumped on the opportunity to voice their concerns.
'Our youth can't wait,' she said. 'We are the leaders on the front lines, mentoring, guiding and protecting Black and brown youth across Portland. The PCL funding is not a luxury, it's a lifeline. You said you wanted to hear from Community Center our voices even now, you heard from our community when we said we wanted new, small and emerging organizations to access PCL funding.'
Others highlighted the diversity of the PLC Allocation Committee, urging the City Council to change its mind.
'We helped shape the recommendations to ensure that the widest variety of communities and the widest possible amount of supports could be provided to communities that need it,' Deian Salazar with the PLC Advisory Council said. 'This portfolio extended to college-age youth for the first time. Even with less funding, we were getting out to more organizations than ever before in an equitable way.'
OR Senate overrides Gov.'s foster children bill veto
After even more testimony, and much discussion between councilors, the ordinance passed unanimously.
'I have something of a reputation for making mistakes and then apologizing repeatedly until I'm blue in the face, sometimes over a period of years,' Novick said. 'And I don't think that– I don't think that doing that is essential to being a good public official, but being willing to change your mind and make mistakes is so. I really appreciate serving in a body where there are people willing to do that.'
Novick also took time to thank community members who came out to testify without knowing if they would get the chance to. Other councilors apologized to those in the audience, saying they got the first vote wrong but were glad to change it today.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
2 hours ago
- New York Post
How Zohran Mamdani's win upended the economics of NYC voting patterns
New Yorkers woke up to a new reality on Wednesday: A proud socialist won the New York City mayoral primary, beating out his nearest rival, former Gov. Andrew Cuomo, by nearly 10 points. Zohran Mamdani ran an avowedly far-left campaign, one focused on kitchen table issues rather than the woke cultural battles we've become accustomed to from the left. Instead of promising to Defund the Police (though he supported that movement in the past) or hyping the historic nature of becoming the first Muslim mayor of New York City, Mamdani promised free busing, a rent freeze, government-owned supermarkets and free childcare — which he said he'd pay for by raising taxes on businesses and the rich. 6 Zohran Mamdani snagged the Democratic nomination for New York's Mayoral race by appealing to the working class, but securing the votes of the elite. Derek French/UPI/Shutterstock Despite the promise of redistributing from each according to his ability, to each according to his need, in an ironic twist, the socialist beat Cuomo handily with wealthy New Yorkers. Meanwhile, Cuomo crushed Mamdani by a staggering 19 points with New Yorkers who make under $50,000 a year. Mamdani also lost in a big way in New York's majority Black neighborhoods, which overwhelmingly chose Cuomo, as did neighborhoods with the highest Hispanic concentration. Cuomo succeeded with voters without a college degree, while Mamdani absolutely slaughtered him among voters with advanced degrees. Mamdani's support was strongest with 'youthful, renter-heavy neighborhoods known for their left-leaning politics,' as The New York Times pointed out. Gentrifiers of the World, unite! Welcome to the new Democratic Party, same as the old, with a slight twist: Instead of imposing cultural doctrine on working-class people of color with zero interest in their woke ideology, the Dems are now imposing a socialist economic agenda on those same recalcitrant normies who just won't get with the program. Mamdani's success with the educated continues a decades-long political realignment in which the working class has been steadily leaving the Democratic Party for the GOP, a process that turbocharged under Donald Trump, while the Democrats' base is now college-educated elites. Nine of the 10 wealthiest congressional districts are currently represented by Democrats, as are 65% of Americans making over $500,000 a year. 6 Mayor Eric Adams is running as an Independent in November against Mamdani. Brian Zak/NY Post 6 Despite being trounced by Mamdani, Andrew Cuomo has not yet agreed to bow out of the Mayor's race. Matthew McDermott The process culminated in the 2024 election with Kamala Harris winning the majority of Americans making over $100,000 a year, while Trump won with those making under. Rather than a repudiation of the trendline in the Democratic Party, Mamdani's success reveals that even when they talk about kitchen table issues, even when they talk about redistributing resources from the wealthy to the poor, progressives are doing so in a way that speaks to the wealthy and alienates working-class voters. Mamdani knew how to perfect the lingo of trust fund socialism from personal experience: He himself is from the exact over-educated, over-credentialed, elite background that the Democrats now represent — whether they are pushing socialism or wokeness. The son of a filmmaker and an academic and educated at a liberal arts college in Maine, Mamdani's campaign staff was equally elite, overrepresented in Ivy League graduates, as reported in the Free Press. Follow The Post's coverage of the NYC mayoral race This is not to say that Mamdani's campaign was totally devoid of cultural battles unpopular with working-class voters. Mamdani joined a protest against border czar Tom Homan at the state Capitol, shouting, 'Do you believe in the First Amendment?!' as Homan disappeared down a corridor munching an apple. Mamdani also opposes the existence of a Jewish state and defended the genocidal cry 'Globalize the Intifada' as being nothing more than a call for Palestinian rights; at Bowdoin College, Mamdani founded his school's chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine. Like Free Palestine or Defund the Police, Zohran became a synonym for cool among young leftists, a brand for disaffected white college grads. And his victory signals where the Democratic Party might be going. 6 A crowd of people is taking photos and videos of Zohran Mamdani on a screen. Derek French/Shutterstock 6 Mamadani's supporters skewed younger, wealthier, and Whiter — the exact opposite of the New Yorkers he claims to champion most. Derek French/UPI/Shutterstock Wokeness is dead, but it's been replaced by something equally at odds with the working-class voters the Dems lost to President Trump: a redistributionist economic socialism that appeals to the elites in the same way that the 'anti-racism' of Robin DiAngelo and the Abolish ICE of AOC did. It turns out, working-class New Yorkers, like working-class Americans more generally, don't want government-run supermarkets any more than they want trans athletes in their daughters' sports. They don't want to abolish the police or ICE. They don't want a rent freeze for already rent-stabilized apartments. They want a fair shot at the American Dream. They want jobs that pay well, less immigration, good healthcare, and — most relevant to the mayor of New York City — safe streets. 6 Zohran Mamdani with his mother, film-maker Mira Nair, and wife, Rama Duwaji, on election night. REUTERS Will the Democratic Party ever learn? I wouldn't bet on it. The party's bigwigs have lined up behind Mamdani, with everyone from Chuck Schumer and Hakim Jeffries to Jerry Nadler and Bill Clinton posting in support of his victory. The media has tried to portray this as the right using Mamdani as the poster child for the Democratic Party, but they're doing that all on their own. The real lesson of Zohran Mamdani's win is this. Though the topic has shifted from culture wars to economics, the Democratic Party still has not learned that the way to get working-class voters is simple: Listen. Batya Ungar-Sargon is the author of 'Second Class: How the Elites Betrayed America's Working Men and Women.'
Atlantic
3 hours ago
- Atlantic
The Anniversary That Democrats Would Be Wise to Forget
Yesterday marked one year since Joe Biden's debate meltdown against Donald Trump. Happy anniversary to those who observe such things, or are triggered by such things. Please celebrate responsibly. For Democrats, the debacle was a harsh awakening and the start of an ongoing spiral. Prior to that night, they could hold on to the delusion that the party might somehow eke out one last victory from Biden's degraded capacity and ward off another four-year assault from Donald Trump. But that all exploded into the gruesome reality of June 27, 2024. Every interested viewer that night remembers where they were, their various feelings (depending on their perspectives) of revulsion, grief, glee, or disbelief. I was watching at home, thinking for some reason that Biden might exceed his humble expectations. He had managed to do this periodically on big stages during his presidency—including the feisty State of the Union address he'd turned in a few months earlier. But by the time Biden walked to his podium in Atlanta, it was clear that was not happening. Something was off. The elderly president looked visibly stiffer than usual, like he was wrapped in cardboard. As co-moderator Jake Tapper of CNN unfurled his opening question—about rising grocery and home prices—Biden's eyes bugged out, as if he was stunned. His face was a drab gray color. I remember thinking there was something wrong with my TV, until the texts started rolling in. A friend observed that Biden looked 'mummified' on the stage. 'Is he sick?' my wife asked as she entered the room. Not a great start. And this was before Biden had even said a word. Then he spoke—or tried to. Biden's voice didn't really work at first. It was raspy; he kept stopping, starting, dry-coughing. After a few sentences, everything was worse. 'Oh my god,' came another text, which was representative of the early returns. 'My mother told me she's crying,' read another. (This person's mother is evidently not a Trump supporter.) My wife left the room. Mark Leibovich: Where is Barack Obama? Now here we are a year later. Democrats have been battered by events since. First among them was Trump's victory in November, in which traditional Democratic constituencies such as Black, Hispanic, and young voters defected to the GOP in large numbers. This was followed by the onslaught of Trump's second administration. Democrats keep getting described (or describing themselves) as being 'in the wilderness,' though at this point 'the wilderness' might be a generous description; it at least offers peace and quiet—as opposed to, say, your average Democratic National Committee meeting in 2025. Or, for that matter, the aftermath of this week's Democratic primary in the New York City mayor's race. Zohran Mamdani, a democratic socialist state assemblyman from Queens, became an instant It Boy with his upset of scandal-soiled former Governor Andrew Cuomo. As happens with many progressive sensations these days, Mamdani's victory was immediately polarizing. New York Democrats seem split over the result: On one side are lukewarm establishment titans such as Senate and House Minority Leaders Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries; on the other are progressive demigods such as Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Senator Bernie Sanders. The usual Democratic divides revealed themselves: insurgent versus establishment, socialist-adjacent versus moderate, young versus old (except for Bernie, the ageless octogenarian forever big with the kids). The deeply unpopular incumbent, Eric Adams, who was elected as a Democrat in 2021, is running for reelection as an independent; despite getting trounced in the primary, Cuomo plans to stay in the race—running on something called the 'Fight and Deliver' ballot line. Mamdani is the clear favorite to prevail in November. But no one knows anything for sure, except that everything feels like a muddled mess, which has pretty much been the Democrats' default posture since the Abomination in Atlanta a year ago. The party's grass roots are showing genuine energy these days. Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez drew five-figure crowds at their 'Fighting Oligarchy' rallies this spring. The nationwide 'No Kings' protests two weekends ago were indicative of a galvanized protest movement eager to be led. Yet these signs of Trump resistance are mostly happening separate from the Democratic apparatus. As my colleague David Graham recently wrote, the 'No Kings' spectacles were themselves, paradoxically, a sign of how rudderless the party now finds itself. With a few exceptions, the Democratic leadership ranks have been largely AWOL. They toggle and flail between quiet paralysis and loud frustration, especially with one another. Mark Leibovich: The week that changed everything for Gavin Newsom Democrats have spent an inordinate amount of time and energy relitigating Biden's tenure in the White House—whether he was fit to be there and how frail he had become. The phrase cognitive decline still comes up a lot, for obvious reasons, none of them fun or especially constructive. The 2024 campaign has also come in for a spirited rehash —especially among factions of Biden world, the Kamala Harris–Tim Walz campaign, and the various PACs and outside groups ostensibly designed to support them. Republicans have of course relished every chance to revisit Biden's deterioration. The media have hammered this theme as well, most notably Tapper and his co-author, Alex Thompson of Axios, whose blockbuster autopsy, Original Sin, has been at or near the top of The New York Times ' nonfiction best-seller list for several weeks. The surest way for Democrats to move on would be to jump straight to the future: Look to 2028, as quickly as possible. Presidential campaigns at their best can be forward-looking, wide-open, and aspirational. Yes, local elections—and certainly the 2026 midterms—are important, and maybe even promising for the party. But not as important as picking a new national leader, something the Democrats have not really done since Barack Obama was first elected in 2008. Among the many tragedies of Biden's last act was that he delayed his party, indefinitely, from anointing its next generation. Trump himself might not be on the ballot in 2028, but he's still giving his opposition plenty to run against. So Democrats might as well take the show national and start now, if for no other reason than to escape from fractures of the present and circular nightmares of the recent past. Which began, more or less, on June 27 of last year. When Democrats stop dwelling on that disaster and what followed, that might signal that they're finally getting somewhere.
Miami Herald
4 hours ago
- Miami Herald
Minimum Wage To Change in 15 States, Cities on July 1: Here's Where
Hundreds of thousands of workers across the U.S. are set to get a pay bump starting July 1, as minimum wage increases take effect in more than a dozen states, cities, and counties. According to the Economic Policy Institute (EPI), more than 800,000 workers in Alaska, Oregon and Washington, D.C. alone will see their baseline pay go up next month. Another dozen local jurisdictions-mostly in California-will also implement increases. The pay hikes come as the federal minimum wage remains stuck at $7.25 per hour, unchanged since 2009. With the cost of living continuing to rise, many states and cities have raised their own minimums through legislation, ballot measures or inflation adjustments. In Alaska, the minimum wage will rise by $1.09 to $13.00 an hour, an increase approved by voters through a ballot measure. EPI calculates the boost will affect 19,400 workers-about 6.3 percent of Alaska's workforce-and add an average of $925 per year to their paychecks. Washington, D.C. will raise its minimum by 45 cents to $17.95 an hour due to an automatic inflation adjustment, impacting an estimated 62,200 workers, or 7.5 percent of the city's workforce. The average worker there will earn about $727 more per year. In Oregon, about 801,700 workers-roughly 9.4 percent of the state's workforce-will see their minimum wage climb 35 cents to $15.05 an hour, also tied to inflation. That's an average annual increase of $420 per worker. Beyond those statewide and D.C. changes, minimum wages will increase in 12 cities and counties next month. That includes 10 cities and counties in California, with increases ranging from 45 to 59 cents an hour. New hourly rates will range from about $17.46 in Alameda to nearly $20 in Emeryville-one of the highest local minimum wages in the country. Cities including Berkeley and San Francisco will see their wages climb to $19.18 an hour, while workers in Los Angeles and surrounding areas will earn just under $18. Outside California, Chicago, Illinois, will boost its minimum wage by 40 cents, bringing it to $16.60 an hour. And in Maryland, Montgomery County will increase its minimum wage by 50 cents to $17.65 an hour. The EPI estimates that about 58 percent of workers benefiting from the July 1 hikes are women, while Black and Hispanic workers will also disproportionately gain. "These minimum wage increases will put more money in workers' pockets, helping many of them and their families make ends meet," EPI state economic analyst Sebastian Martinez Hickey said. "The average increase in annual wages for a full-time, year-round worker resulting from these minimum wage hikes ranges from $420 in Oregon to $925 in Alaska." Calls to raise the federal wage persist. This month, Republican Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri and Democratic Senator Peter Welch of Vermont introduced a bipartisan bill to lift the federal minimum to $15 per hour-more than double the current rate. Starting July 1, employers will have to ensure they review the changes made in different cities to minimum wage rates and pay their employees accordingly. Related Articles Joe Rogan Trashes US Minimum Wage: 'Disgusting'California Cities To See Minimum Wage Change on July 1Donald Trump Weighs In on Plan To Increase Minimum WageLos Angeles Votes for $30 Minimum Wage 2025 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.
