A conversation with Kate Brown, Oregon Senate majority leader
BYLINE: Justin Stranzl
Kate Brown got more than she asked for Tuesday. With the Democrats' reclamation of the Oregon House, highway builders may have, too. Brown, a Portland Democrat and the Oregon Senate majority leader, hoped for and received a decisive victory by Gov. Ted Kulongoski in his reelection campaign against Republican Ron Saxton. But the Democrats' victory in the House was a surprise to many, and it assured for Brown an easier time dealing with the 2007 House than what she experienced in 2005, when Republican Karen Minnis served as House speaker. The victory assures a 2007 version of "ConnectOregon 2" - an update of the $100 million multimodal transportation package that Gov. Kulongoski pushed for in 2005, and an update that Brown says could be worth significantly more. And the Democrats' victory in both Oregon chambers betters the chances of a renewed investment in the state's transportation infrastructure - spending on bridges and highways that Saxton was unwilling to commit to as he campaigned this year.
DJC: What does it mean for the business community now that the Democrats control the House and the Senate? Kate Brown: I think what we've tried to develop is a very pragmatic agenda. When we developed that agenda we didn't know what the House was going to look like or who was going to be speaker. And so we wanted an agenda that was going to work for all Oregonians. So it's pretty basic stuff. We're not going to do anything outrageous or anything radical. And frankly we couldn't get the vote to do anything outrageous or radical. For example, the renewable energy package we tried to pass last time around, that's definitely part of our package. I think this is really good for economic development for rural Oregon and for urban Oregon; it's good for the environment. It'll do wonders for jobs in rural Oregon. But the best part about it, in addition to the job piece, is it's trying to break down that urban/rural divide. That's really an important piece. I think transportation is something my members have worked really closely with the business community on. I've been trying to get a drumbeat going. The governor has his CO2 package, the ConnectOregon 2 package, that's the multimodal transportation sequel, and I think that's great - I just don't think it's enough. And for anybody trying to move goods around the state, everybody knows we need to do some more investment in the infrastructure.
DJC: What is enough? When Kulongoski first proposed ConnectOregon there was gridlock in the Senate. And if I remember correctly, the Legislature wasn't so keen on ConnectOregon. Brown: I assume Congressman (Earl) Blumenauer will help us leverage federal dollars, Congressman DeFazio as well, to really sort of improve and modernize our transportation infrastructure at all levels. (ConnectOregon 2) is really important because that's your multimodal - your trains, your airports, your rural airports, your ports.
DJC: What stands out to you that didn't get done the first time around? Brown: It was just a narrow amount of dollars, particularly in the Portland metro area, because the dollars were divided up via congressional districts, and on a per capita basis that really short-changes some of your metro areas. But I know the governor is working on the bi-state (collaboration). A really good example of what we need to address is the Washington-Oregon transportation corridor. And why Oregonians - and, frankly, Oregon businesses - should care, and I know they do, is if we can't move goods from here north or south we're going to be in big trouble. So the governor's got a huge task force working on it. I hope we can come up with some great ideas and some resources to really invest in our transportation infrastructure. So that would be another piece.
DJC: Is it safe to say there will be more money this time for ConnectOregon 2 than there was for ConnectOregon 1? Brown: I don't know if it'll be more; I don't know if it'll be distributed differently. I just think you'll see some efforts at an additional transportation package.
DJC: It's interesting that you say there will be more for the metro area this time. One of the concerns I heard last time was that this was a package for the Port of Portland. Brown: Well, it didn't turn out that way, clearly. It was divided up amongst the congressional districts on an equal basis. I do think this year the package was definitely the port of Portland, I do think it all benefits the Port of Portland. All of those dollars going into that infrastructure. But when I talk about how we need to invest in our transportation, I'm talking about outside the multimodal.
DJC: So we can expect a lot more highway construction? Brown: I don't know yet. I met with Sam Adams when the Portland City Council brought metro area legislators together and they're very interested in the local basics.
DJC: Is that weird? When I heard Sam Adams was going to spend every week trying to come to Salem, I thought that was a lot for a city councilor to do. Brown: I think it's a lot, but I think it's a good thing. Particularly now given the make-up of Congress, I think it's really important that we work together and leverage every dollar that we can get. I think one of the other sort of biggest issues I would throw out there that we're focusing on is education and health care. And I will tell you every business in the state is being impacted by the rising costs of health care. We've got a couple of things, one is the children's package, which is basically requiring every child to be covered by health insurance. What we've got (Ashland Senator) Dr. (Alan) Bates working on is a bigger package: How can we figure out a way for everyone in the state to be covered? I think that benefits businesses if we can figure out a way to pay for it. But I hear businesses say all the time, "Health care is becoming a huge liability for us, how can we continue to pay the costs?" So I think we're going to look at a menu of options in the health-care arena.
DJC: The building industry, endorsed Kulongoski in 2002; this time around the Associated General Contractors supported both Kulongoski and Saxton. Their reasoning was Kulongoski was for the ConnectOregon 2 package, and Saxton because he wanted to lower the statute of repose for building defects. That's something that will come before the Legislature this year - a task force will come to you and say, "We need to scale this back. " Brown: I don't know what the impact of that task force - I haven't met with those folks in a while - so I honestly can't say. It will be something we'll take a look at.
DJC: Are you amenable to that? Brown: Me, personally, I would have concerns about it. I'd certainly like to take a look at the specifics, but that's not usually the direction I go in. One of the things I see is the process piece. Ideally, we'd like to hear and listen to ideas before we shut the door on them. I like to hear both sides and find out really wherever they're coming from, etcetera, and I think that's one of the things that's been lacking in the legislative process and the citizen input. I think what you'll see more of is an opportunity for citizens to participate. We've got incredible technology, teleconferencing, video-conferencing. We led the charge in getting hearings; we've never had Ways and Means hearings outside of the capital. We're going to continue that, and that give-and-take from the public will be a huge aspect of our work in Salem.
DJC: What about biofuels? Last legislative session (Karen Minnis) was standing in your way on that. Brown: It was actually two issues standing in our way on that. One was the pollution control tax credit; that tax credit is due to expire in '07. My understanding is the Oregon Business Association is working on a compromise proposal on that. The other issue that's been in the way is air emissions, DEQ, and the only way we could move the biofuels forward through the House was to include a repeal of early '70s language regarding the air emissions that have been on the books since then. By repealing that language, that would have prohibited the governor from moving forward on the tailpipe emissions, and that was just not a deal we were willing to make.
DJC: Are those problems not in your way anymore? Brown: Instaed of Karen Minnis and Wayne Scott negotiating on energy fuels, it's probably going to be Jeff Kropf. And on the Senate side Vicki Walker, who's been working that issue very strongly. So who's at the table and what the exchange is has really changed.
DJC: But I would imagine you feel like the prospects are better. Brown: Oh, definitely, no question. We're not going to be held hostage on a biofuels package. We're going to move forward a package. The question is: what are going to be the specifics? It's not "if we're going to do it," it's, "What is it going to look like?"
DJC: Was it tough with some of the things Democrats and Kulongoski have talked about, not having been able to make them happen, and then in California to have Schwarzenegger get out in front of Oregon? Brown: No question. It was very interesting. I think we have folks in the House, Republican leadership, that have very strong philosophies and were very good negotiators. I think the dynamic clearly has changed. I think that will enable us to really get some good things done for Oregonians that will benefit Oregon. I'm pretty excited about it.
DJC: What about the Oregon Innovation Council's proposals for three more centers of innovation? What will happen there? Brown: Well, I would just say the Senate Democrats have been very supportive of these high-tech (and) nanotechnology proposals. They've moved very easily out of the Senate these last couple of sessions. My understanding is the Oregon Innovation Council proposal is a $40 million package, and I know there's specific branches. I guess what I would say is we'll be looking at those very carefully. We want to make sure Oregon taxpayers are getting the bang for the buck. We've revised our budgeting process, so we're really prioritizing. So that project, while I may think it's a really good investment, has got to go through the same level of scrutiny that any other program would get in Oregon. I certainly support it. I don't want all our eggs in one basket. I think it's really important for us to continue down this path, but it's certainly going to have to prove that it's worth the investment.
DJC: You sound hesitant. Brown: No, not at all. Are you kidding? For these guys, I've been very supportive. I just don't want folks to come in and think that just because Democrats are in control that somebody's going to be signing checks. You've got to prove (your worth). With the money we spend, we want to see outcomes, we want to see how it fits into Oregon's benchmarks and that the dollars we spend are going to be effective.
DJC: But you're in the position where, for the first time, you can just write checks. Since 1990 you haven't had Democrats controlling everything. Now you do. Brown: Right, there's no Karen Minnis standing in my way. Number one, Oregon is required to have a balanced budget, so unlike the federal government or our fiscally conservative president, George Bush, we can't just spend away. We have that. We have the kicker law. We're also very cognizant of the fact that we have a very active initiative system and, while we were successful in beating back some of the most devastating initiatives, you know, it's still an active issue in the system. So there's a tension between a representative democracy, which is the legislative process, and direct democracy, which is the initiative process. And both sides of the aisle are very savvy about the initiative process.
DJC: Is our initiative process too active? Brown: I think the many measures this time around (that were rejected) are going to maybe swing the balance the other way. Oregon voters have proven time and time again that they're very discerning. I think it was an interesting case of the business community really stepping up to the plate on measures like 41 and 48. Business leadership was crucial to our defeating those measures. We're going to work very closely with the business community as we work on the budget.
DJC: The governor has this program for shovel-ready sites, and most of the good ones have kind of dried up at this point. Will we see an expansion of that? Brown: That was part of the Legislature's work in '03, and I know Rick Metzger worked on industrial land, shovel-ready sites. I think it's something we're very open to doing (more of). I think it's going to be a critical problem for the future as Oregon's population grows. So I'm certainly open to that. Frankly, I haven't checked off where we are in our 50 shovel-ready sites.
DJC: So it's not on the front burner? Brown: No, I think it's a really important piece. It's just really detailed stuff. We'll be working on it. I don't see that issue going away. It's like the pie crust. Like transportation infrastructure. It's not sexy stuff, but it's got to be done. And I see the investment in engineering and work-force development, the transportation infrastructure, the land use, readily available sites like the pie crust. You need those pieces.