Featured Stories

Letters: Create a tiny-house village for homeless

Readers' letters, published August 2, 2016 -

Create a tiny-house village for homeless

PMG FILE PHOTO - One citizen argues that tiny houses might best house the homeless.The world moves fast, but if you peek into your archives, back on Oct. 9, 2015, you published an idea of mine regarding a funding solution for homelessness. Now, as I see the population of such folks multiplying, we could take some of that money and create a tiny-house village as a possible solution.

Eliminates the need for a large building, right? All we need is the land. The manufactured little homes could be hauled onto the site in a day.

Yes, the infrastructure would have to be in place. Wouldn’t this simply be a speedy way to get people into housing without having to renovate an existing building? Surely, it would be. Once all the various agendas of politicians are set aside and people actually worked together, mountains could be moved.

Rules would definitely have to be in place, but I happen to be of the opinion that if you provide someone with something new, that person is most likely going to treat it with respect. Just set up a main lodge, if you will, with people to act as hosts, like in a wilderness campground. Computers, phones, a mail service and other needs could be offered to those folks without access to such technology. Food boxes could even be delivered to those who qualify.

Most people are inclined to follow majority rule, they want to be like others, so anyone tossing trash around would quickly get the hint. Self-policing, see.

The money is there. The tiny houses exist. There has to be land somewhere ... why not right now?

Mark L. Brown

Southeast Portland

Powell, not Division, a better commuting solution

There would be no “Rapid” in the Bus Rapid Transit Line (BRT) proposed for Southeast Division by TriMet and Metro (The Portland Tribune, July 26 article).

Still chasing federal grant money for their failed idea for rapid bus service to East Portland along Southeast Powell, TriMet and Metro planners, thinking deep inside their box, have hatched a plan to eliminate many bus stops along Division west of Southeast 82nd, thus depriving residents of inner Southeast the decent bus service they currently enjoy.

Seemingly oblivious to the monster apartment buildings along inner Division and commuters in the adjacent neighborhoods, TriMet and Metro seem to want to serve cars more than people. Their analyses that longer articulated buses (failures in the past), squeezed into this two-lane street, replete with bioswales, curb extensions and delivery trucks for the myriad new businesses on Division, is deeply flawed. It should also be mentioned that businesses who currently enjoy proximities to existing bus stops pay a hefty tax to TriMet for “service.” Are customers going to shop at your store when the bus carries them four blocks beyond your former convenient stop? 

Just because they came up with this plan does not mean it is the right solution. The proven arrogance of many regional “leaders” in not listening to neighborhood residents, coupled with the desperate chase for grant money, could result in a huge new boondoggle. The solution easing the commute from East County to downtown Portland lies on four-lane Southeast Powell, possibly by elevated rail, as the Division Design Initiative team has suggested, not on Southeast Division. Remember, Division was not the first choice, nor should it be.  Give your thoughts to Metro Councilor Bob Stacy at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. and take the survey at www.trimet.org/survey .

Frank DiMarco 

Southeast Portland

Don’t like this tax? Find a better solution

Regarding the article “Tax critics raise $5.2 million” (July 14 Portland Tribune, online July 12): As an investment adviser of 35 years, I have to examine the pros and cons of every option. When analyzing financial options, any CPA will tell you about double-entry accounting: Every transaction has both a plus and minus bookkeeping effect.  

The anti-IP28 folks are ignoring the equity side of the equation. Even if it were true (it isn’t) that IP28 will cost each of us an extra $600 per year, will absolutely nothing be gained in exchange? For example, is education worthless? The answer is no.

The fact is, there are too many large corporate freeloaders enjoying all that’s great about Oregon while shirking their share of the costs for that greatness.

Don’t like IP28? Let’s see a better, immediate solution.

Gary Duell

Happy Valley

Get back in the box

“We’ve got to think outside the box” — that was a recent quote from (Portland) Mayor Charlie Hales regarding the homeless. Unfortunately, that seems to be what he’s been doing. I will say he’s been “creative,” but it’s time for him to get back inside the box and wait for someone competent to clean up his mess. His disparate solutions are bankrupting the city.

Laird Heater

North Portland

Why not raise prices already?

If large (and often out-of-state) businesses could raise their prices 2.5 percent — as the (Portland) Tribune says they will come the passage of Measure 97 (July 21 editorial) — without losing market share, then why haven’t they 

done so already?

Brian Allan Cobb

Oxbow Regional Park