District 4 candidate · Portland City Council · November 3, 2026
Mitch Green
Incumbent councilor; economist, Army veteran and former Bonneville Power Administration employee.
Reach the campaign
- mitch4portland.com (opens in a new tab)
- info@mitch4portland.com
- Instagram (opens in a new tab)
- Facebook (opens in a new tab)
- Bluesky (opens in a new tab)
As published in their pamphlet statement and campaign site.
Campaign finance: sources, amounts and timing ↓
In their words
Said: I’m Mitch Green, a PhD economist, a US Army veteran, a democratic socialist, and a Portland City Councilor representing District 4.
Pamphlet p. 62
Candidate statement · November 2026 edition; extracted September 20, 2026
Multnomah County voters’ pamphlet · PDF page 62 ↗Verbatim opening of the candidate's own statement; publication by the county does not verify the claims. The greeting “Hi, Portland.” that precedes it is skipped.
The verbatim opening of their voters’ pamphlet statement, the same rule for every candidate. We chose nothing.
What they say they would do
Our summary of their platform, in our wordsIdentifies as a democratic socialist and proposes permanent affordability, tenant power and climate investment.
- Expand permanently affordable housing and tenant collective bargaining.
- Require greater contributions from large corporations.
- Protect climate funding and reduce fossil-fuel activity at the CEI Hub.
Our reading
Our interpretation, not their wordsHis approach changes ownership and bargaining power as well as housing supply. Establishing a housing study or tenant protection is an intermediate step; financing, production and long-term operating performance remain separate tests.
Where they stand
Rent and homes
Affordable rents tied to income- What
Supports public or nonprofit housing with rents linked to income and tenant unions involved in managing it.
Full position and context
Favors permanently affordable social housing with rents linked to income and tenant unions built into governance.
- How
- Said: Points to the Keep Portland Housed ordinance’s $17.5M for buying commercial buildings to convert and a revolving loan fund, plus a Housing Bureau study of alternative financing models.
- Measured by
- Said: Rent tied to income: someone earning $10,000 a year would pay no more than $3,000 in rent.
Camps, crime and who responds
Expand crisis teams; protect police oversight- What
Would expand Portland Street Response, protect non-police responders from budget cuts and preserve the office overseeing police conduct.
Full position and context
Would protect and expand Portland Street Response, defend unarmed first responders against budget cuts, and protect the Office for Community Police Accountability, pressing for police transparency and accountability.
- How
- Said: Secured FY 2025–26 funding to restart an independent evaluation of Street Response and created a public-safety set-aside fund to add staff as the program moves to a 24/7 model.
- Measured by
- Not found in the reviewed sources
Your bills and taxes
Public money for public ownership- What
Favors investing public money in publicly owned assets and cooperatives. Treats preschool and support for working families as economic investments.
Full position and context
Favors public dollars invested in public assets and cooperative ownership. Describes preschool and support for working families as economic development.
- How
- Said: Names larger contributions from the biggest corporations as the revenue source; no rate or amount is given.
- Measured by
- Not found in the reviewed sources
Streets, buses and air
Expand climate funding; reject diversions- What
Would preserve and expand the clean-energy fund. Opposes using it for arena renovations or more police funding, and supports walkable neighborhoods and car-free spaces.
Full position and context
Would preserve and expand PCEF and make it more effective at supporting clean energy development; opposes its use for Moda renovations and increased police funding. Supports walkable, transit-oriented neighborhoods and car-free spaces.
- How
- Not found in the reviewed sources
- Measured by
- Not found in the reviewed sources
The choices this office faces
Every candidate in this race is asked the same 9 questions. Mitch Green is on record on 7, with 2 still open. A question without an answer is a research gap, not a position.
No answer we could findAdd police officers, expand non-police responders, or both?
Nothing on this exact choice in the sources we reviewed.
Restrict new AI data centers in the city?
Nothing on this exact choice in the sources we reviewed.
Rezone the inner east side to allow apartment buildings off the main streets (the Inner Eastside Zoning Project)?
Said: Will vote yes when it reaches Council; co-sponsored the 2026 resolution that set the timeline, and calls legalizing apartments off corridors the fix for the city’s 1981 downzoning.
Public money and terms for renovating the Moda Center?
Mitch Green: NoVoted no on Approve the Moda negotiating framework
Said: Says Portlanders should not cover the cost of remodeling the Moda Center and the Blazers' ownership will pay their fair share; refused an NDA to negotiate.
When, if ever, would they raise taxes or fees?
Said: Plans to make the biggest corporations pay their fair share; no rate or instrument is named.
Keep funding camp removals at current levels?
Mitch Green: YesVoted yes on Shift funding away from homeless-camp removals
Said: Opposes sweeps as expensive and ineffective, would move money from removals to hygiene and housing investment, and opposes camping bans and hostile architecture that criminalize poverty.
Expand Portland Street Response to a full 24/7 role?
Mitch Green: YesVoted yes on Expand Portland Street Response’s role
Said: Created a public-safety set-aside fund to add Street Response staff as the program moves to a 24/7 model, and funded an independent evaluation.
Keep the monthly street repair fee?
Mitch Green: YesVoted yes on Create a monthly transportation utility fee
No statement beyond the recorded vote.
Raise water bills to pay for the Bull Run filtration plant and system repairs?
Mitch Green: YesVoted yes on Raise annual water rates
Said: Says he pushed for cost controls on the Bull Run project to prevent water rates from doubling; the statement does not say whether bills should rise to pay for the plant.
On the topic; the exact choice is unsaid.
Council votes
Recorded vote · then our reading of the recordRaise water bills by about $5 a month?
YesOur reading: Opposed construction borrowing; supported the annual charges
What Council decided
This increase would bring in more money for the water system. A typical monthly water charge would rise from about $66 to $71, before sewer and stormwater charges.
The typical-bill estimate assumes five hundred cubic feet of monthly water use. Actual bills depend on use, billing period and applicable assistance; this is not the total combined utility bill.
Add a monthly fee to help repair streets?
YesOur reading: Supported the fee and reconsidering how businesses are charged
What Council decided
The fee is $12 for a typical house or $8.40 per apartment. Most of the money goes to street repairs; the rest goes to safety improvements.
Approving a revenue source does not show that every promised repair has happened. The ordinance includes review of business charges and assistance for residents.
Use expected savings to help fund police and firefighters?
NoOur reading: Favored restoring more services, then accepted a smaller plan
What Council decided
The city expected the office that checks police conduct to have money left over. This proposal would use those expected savings for police and fire services. The savings were not guaranteed.
The tradeoff concerned using money allocated to the new oversight office. The proposal did not abolish that office, and expected underspending was a forecast.
Back these starting terms for renovating Moda Center?
NoOur reading: Rejected the arena cost; supported performing-arts planning
What Council decided
The city proposed $120 million for renovations and $275 million for future building needs over 20 years. This vote approved terms for negotiations, not a final contract.
A negotiating framework, not a final construction contract. Support or opposition to this package is not a complete position on retaining the Trail Blazers.
A Term sheet. Starting terms for a negotiation. Approving one is not a final contract., not a final contract.
A question the evidence leaves open
Which corporate-revenue tools are legally available to Council, and how would they fund permanent housing?
Sources (7)
- Multnomah County voters’ pamphlet · PDF page 62Candidate statement · November 2026 edition; reviewed September 18, 2026Written by the candidate or campaign. Publication by the county does not verify the claims.
- Portland: Neighbors Welcome 2026 endorsement questionnaire · Mitch Green’s responsesCandidate statement · Responses posted September 22, 2026; reviewed October 14, 2026The candidate’s own written answers, published by a group that endorses in this race. Campaign position; claimed results have not been independently verified.
- Council Lab · current-term record and official-source linksReporting · Current-term research indexIndependent, unofficial research aid. Follow the linked City records for authoritative votes. Automated transcript excerpts require recording verification before quotation.
- Green · prioritiesCandidate statement · Website reviewed September 18, 2026Campaign position. Claimed results and numerical premises have not automatically been independently verified.
- Green · statement responding to The Oregonian and Chief Day (council office press release)Candidate statement · Councilor’s own office statement, September 16, 2026; read September 22, 2026Published by the councilor’s own office. Claims in it have not automatically been independently verified.
- Green · recordCandidate statement · Website reviewed September 22, 2026Campaign position. Claimed results and numerical premises have not automatically been independently verified.
- Green · policy (City of Portland council office page)Candidate statement · Councilor’s own office page; read September 22, 2026Published by the councilor’s own office. Claims in it have not automatically been independently verified.