The research log

September 25, 2026 · Candidate response: Barbara J Kahl on education (U.S. House, Oregon District 1)

Barbara J Kahl sent an answer on education to go with her twelve earlier answers. She would replace the Every Student Succeeds Act with what she calls the Student Teacher Empowerment Act, focused on measurable progress in core subjects with required yearly training for teachers; remove tablets below ninth grade; make PE, music and art core subjects through sixth grade; move administrative budgets to teacher pay and smaller classes; and let funding follow the student where public school is not the right fit. It appears in her own words on her brief. The reply is kept on file.

September 25, 2026 · Forum remarks: Governor (Oregon Business & Industry and Portland Business Journal, September 24)

Tina Kotek and Christine Drazan answered the same questions on the economy at a forum hosted by Oregon Business & Industry and the Portland Business Journal; Brett Smith was not on stage. The Lab worked from a transcript without speaker labels, but with two candidates and the moderator naming who answered first on every question, each answer is certain. The state-taxes board now uses both candidates’ forum answers. Kotek said she is open to raising the Corporate Activity Tax threshold for small businesses if trimming tax breaks that have not helped competitiveness pays for it, and wants a tax review led by an outside party; this replaces her April 2026 signing letter on the H.R. 1 tax disconnect as the source. Drazan said business taxes are too high, would raise the same threshold past $2 million, reform the estate tax and selectively preempt local taxes; her pledge to veto new taxes stays in her money column. Claims about each other and unsourced statistics were not used.

September 25, 2026 · Added context: the size of the 2027–29 state budget gap (Governor)

A reader asked how big the 2027–29 budget gap on the governor page is in percentage terms. The page said federal H.R. 1 would open a gap but gave no size. It now gives the one published figure: the governor’s Medicaid advisory group estimates the Oregon Health Plan will be $421 million short in General Fund money for 2027–29, about 1% of the $42.4 billion the September forecast expects the state to collect. No all-in estimate has been published; the governor’s recommended budget in December should be the first. The reserve share now reads as 9.7% of General Fund revenue, the forecast’s own wording, and the taxes board now calls the $400 million 2025–27 ending balance money left over, so it is not mistaken for the Medicaid gap.

September 25, 2026 · Corrections: Ali Beaudoin’s pronouns, and the ballot header

A reader told us that Ali Beaudoin (District 3) is a man. The Lab had used “she” and “her” for him in the September 23 entry below and in one comparison on his District 3 page. Those now read “he” and “his.” The same reader pointed out that the guide’s front page said “One ballot,” when Multnomah County voters get a separate ranked-choice ballot card alongside the standard one, as they did in 2024. The heading now reads “One election.”

September 25, 2026 · Candidate response: Barbara J Kahl (U.S. House, Oregon District 1)

Barbara J Kahl answered all twelve questions. All four of her issue columns now have “how” steps, three with a measure: HUD grants for construction and rehabilitation and HHS-funded recovery networks; federal COPS and SAFER grants with task forces on cybercrime, narcotics and trafficking; a larger federal audit team, fewer duplicate regulations and no tax increases; and Columbia River dredging, hydropower and small modular reactors. Eight topic boards changed: she supports H.R. 1’s work and verification rules, funding ICE with caveats, the Fix Our Forests Act, existing federal housing programs and reining in data centers; opposes restoring the ACA credits in favor of price and antitrust reform; would phase in any tariffs with income-tax cuts; and says Congress should decide on Iran after consulting people with military experience there. She asked that her answers not lose detail to paraphrase, so her brief quotes them nearly in full. The reply is kept on file.

September 25, 2026 · Candidate response: Diana Helm (Clackamas County Commissioner, Position 4)

Diana Helm answered the four questions the Lab sent. Her crisis-care and budget columns, empty before, now have positions: the deflection program and the Milwaukie Stabilization Center now, the Recovery Campus in fall 2027 and a study of a new jail’s cost and site; and balanced department budgets with General Fund priority for public safety, health, housing, human services and transportation. Her data-center entry gains a “how” step: the moratorium holds until the county codifies rules on water, energy, sound and air quality. On the judicial-warrant question she repeated that County Counsel recommends following state law, so that entry stays partial. The reply is kept on file.

September 25, 2026 · Candidate response: Ali Beaudoin (District 3)

Ali Beaudoin added that clearing unsafe camping areas has support when stable housing and appropriate support come with it. The camp-removal entry now says so; it stays partial because the answer does not say whether removal funding should stay at current levels.

September 25, 2026 · Debate remarks: Multnomah County District 2 (City Club, September 24)

City Club of Portland’s District 2 debate on September 24 at PCC Cascade featured four of the seven candidates: Bri Williams, Nabil Zaghloul, Nathan Ong Norris and Serena Cruz. The Lab worked from a transcript without speaker labels and used an answer only when a self-reference or the moderator’s rotation made the speaker certain; the attribution for every question is recorded with the research.

Nineteen topic-board entries changed. Williams now has entries on the Moda Center, sanctuary, the city-county agreement, shelter funding, Preschool for All and the budget gap; Zaghloul on the Moda Center, Preschool for All (including indexing the tax thresholds to inflation), the budget gap, the city-county agreement and jail staffing; Ong Norris on sanctuary, jails, shelter and the budget gap; and Cruz on sanctuary and jail staffing. Ong Norris’s Moda entry moved from “opposes,” based on his July testimony, to “mixed,” because at the debate he said the county belongs at the table but got too little in return. Cruz’s Preschool for All entry now uses her debate answer. Williams and Zaghloul gained positions on roads, bridges and air, and Ong Norris on crisis care and jails. Bruce Broussard, Herman Greene and Tony Robertson were not on the stage, and their pages did not change.

September 25, 2026 · Correction at the candidate’s request: David Russ (U.S. House, Oregon District 6)

David Russ wrote that his housing position misstated him. His reply of September 24 criticized federal money for NGOs; our summary said “nonprofit organizations,” and he notes that many NGOs are nonprofits but not all. The quoted excerpt had also dropped his sentence on progressive policy. His housing position now says NGOs and uses the clarification he sent, that these entities spend more on staff, consulting and programs that keep homeless people dependent than on helping them become independent. His full original paragraph, including the dropped sentence, and his clarification are quoted on his brief.

September 25, 2026 · Correction: Kellie Torres’s safety summary (District 3)

A reader on Reddit pointed out that Kellie Torres’s safety chip, “More police investigations,” did not match her source. Her priorities page supports “public safety staffing and resources that allow police to follow through on investigations, fix emergency response times, and make neighborhoods safe.” That is about finishing the cases police already have and responding faster, and the chip read as a call for more investigations. The chip now reads “Police follow-through,” and her line and position quote her framing more closely. The source did not change.

September 24, 2026 · Second candidate response: John McDonald (District 4)

John McDonald supports a 24/7 Portland Street Response, which he puts at 68 full-time positions and $10.5 million a year, paid mainly from the General Fund, with partnerships with the VA, TriMet and Central City Concern and the City’s share of the Oregon opioid settlement to fill gaps in lean years. He also shared two recent articles: “Commuter rail’s price of protection” in Trains and “In Vancouver, Pride Became An Answer To Fear” in OutSFL, whose byline the Lab confirmed. His Street Response board, empty before, now has his answer; excerpts appear on his brief, and the reply is kept on file. He wrote that more answers are coming.

September 24, 2026 · Candidate response: Matt Schulte (District 4)

Matt Schulte sent a document answering every gap on his page. It proposes a Portland Affordability Rule keeping growth in combined City-controlled household costs below household income growth; a ReBoot service-navigation program; more housing and office conversions, with a mitigation fund for the City’s home-sharing pilot; and a finished Safe Routes network around every District 4 elementary school within one term. On the Council’s choices, he would not start with new City taxes or fees, would fill funded police positions and shift non-emergency calls before expanding, would restructure camp removals, supports a citywide 24/7 Street Response within a year, would keep the street repair fee, would count water-rate increases against his affordability cap, and generally supports the Moda term sheet while calling for more concessions from the team’s owner.

All four of his columns now cite the reply, with “how” and “measured by” steps; his housing column, empty before, has a position, and his bills and streets columns now reflect the proposals he named for them. Seven topic boards changed: four were empty, and his Moda, camps and Street Response entries now record his answers. His document also proposed biography and summary text; the Lab’s own summary is written separately and was not replaced. Excerpts appear on his brief, and the reply is kept on file.

September 24, 2026 · Candidate response: Will DelPlato (Gresham Council, Position 2)

Will DelPlato answered most of the Lab’s questions. He would streamline permitting with a business liaison and a pre-approved home design program modeled on Bend’s; protect police and fire and oppose permissive camping policies; review purchasing, contracts and program results before new taxes or fees; and extend Gresham’s capital plan to 10 to 20 years. He would keep the groundwater system, is still reviewing the public-safety fee, and says his focus on immigration is local.

All four of his columns gained “how” steps, three with a measure. His groundwater entry, a partial reading of his pamphlet, now records support; camping and immigration now carry partial entries noting what he did not address. Excerpts appear on his brief, and the reply is kept on file.

September 24, 2026 · Candidate response: David Russ (U.S. House, Oregon District 6)

David Russ answered all eleven questions. He says economic growth will reduce homelessness and opposes funding nonprofit organizations he says overpay staff; would fund federal enforcement; would support the Fix Our Forests Act only as a stopgap; would keep H.R. 1’s Medicaid and SNAP rules; would not restore the ACA credits or end the tariffs; opposes an expanded federal housing role and federal limits on data centers; and says the Iran decision belongs to those with the highest-level security briefings.

His housing column, empty before, now has a position, with a measure for safety and a “how” note for land transfers. Eight topic boards changed; his ICE and forest entries had been partial readings of his campaign site. His wording is paraphrased in neutral terms on the boards and quoted on his brief. The reply is kept on file.

September 24, 2026 · Candidate response: Gregory Schroeder (Gresham Council, Position 4)

Gregory Schroeder answered all ten questions the Lab emailed him on September 22. He would cut unnecessary City fees and streamline development review, expand rehabilitation grants and down-payment help, and measure results by housing built, homeownership and fewer cost-burdened households. He favors nonprofit outreach matched to each person, with enforcement when available services are refused; efficient use of existing revenue and economic growth before asking residents to pay more; and separated bike routes, sidewalk gaps and safer crossings rather than new shared on-street bike lanes. On Gresham’s choices, he would move the $15 fee toward voter-approved funding rather than raise or drop it, is open to a fire district if a cost-benefit analysis supports it, would use reserves only for one-time costs, wants an accounting and a systemwide taste fix before more water-rate increases, supports the camping restrictions while remaining wary of pod shelters, and opposes a local immigration-enforcement emergency declaration.

His safety and bills columns, empty before, now have positions; housing gained “how” and “measured by” steps and streets a “how” step. All six Gresham topic boards, empty before, now have entries. His campaign site, Greg4Gresham.com, and its email were added to his contacts. Excerpts appear on his brief, and the reply is kept on file.

September 23, 2026 · Correction: swapped portraits (Washington County Commissioner, District 4)

Kipperlyn Sinclair’s campaign told us her page showed her opponent’s photo. The two portraits in this race were swapped when they were cut from the voters’ pamphlet page they share: Sinclair’s page showed Steve Callaway, and his showed her. Both are now correct. The Lab checked the other pair taken from a shared pamphlet page in this county’s race pack and found no other swap.

September 23, 2026 · Candidate response: Ali Beaudoin (District 3)

Ali Beaudoin answered all eleven questions in the Lab’s follow-up. He would increase housing supply, simplify permitting and explore temporary interest-rate help for first-time buyers; match the response to the problem, with enforcement for crime, prevention through services and non-police care; grow the tax base by filling commercial vacancies before raising taxes; and put street maintenance, sidewalks, safer crossings and reliable buses first. On the Council’s choices, he would generally hold the line on new taxes and fees, rebuild police staffing where gaps are documented, pause new AI data centers, expand Street Response toward 24/7 where data supports it, keep fees only where shown necessary, and support phased water-rate increases with cost controls and protections for households that cannot pay. On camp removals he would enforce public-space rules and measure outcomes but did not say whether to keep current funding.

His housing, safety and climate columns, empty before, now have positions, and his bills column gained a “how” step. Seven topic boards, empty before, now have entries. Excerpts appear on his brief, and the reply is kept on file.

September 23, 2026 · Candidate response: Jayne Cronlund (District 4)

Jayne Cronlund answered the three questions the Lab emailed her on September 19. She would cut the $800 million parks maintenance backlog 35% without new taxes and report progress to voters, supports a modest police increase tied to shorter response times, lists Moda Center renovations among her spending priorities for prevailing-wage jobs and the Albina Vision Trust’s development, and would fund a City Hall–led planning process from her office budget. On housing, she would have the Housing Bureau hold nonprofit partners accountable and the permitting bureau speed conversions of vacant downtown offices to housing. She describes founding the Backyard Habitat Certification program at Three Rivers Land Conservancy and the Restore Oregon award for her family business’s Firehouse 17 restoration.

Her housing and safety columns, empty before, now have positions, with a “how” step for housing and a parks-backlog measure under streets, buses and air. Two topic boards, Moda and police staffing, now have entries. Her open question now asks how the backlog would shrink without new taxes and over what period. Excerpts appear on her brief, and the reply is kept on file.

September 23, 2026 · Candidate response: Heather Coleman-Cox (Gresham Council, Position 2)

Heather Coleman-Cox answered all ten questions the Lab emailed her on September 22. She supports renewing the public-safety levy, staying on the groundwater system (while saying residents deserved louder notice of the switch) and keeping the Police, Fire and Parks Fee at $15. She would stop covering the recurring budget gap from reserves without jumping to service cuts, is open to pod shelters under the new permit code once operator, siting and results are clear, and is open to an immigration-enforcement emergency declaration if it gives the City a practical way to protect residents. She describes her roles as vice chair of the Community Development and Housing Committee and chair of the Public Safety Levy Committee.

Her bills column gained a “how” step citing this reply. Six topic boards changed: the fee, the budget gap, camping and immigration, empty before, now have entries, and her levy and groundwater entries, partial readings of her platform and a 2026 Outlook quote, now record the answers she gave us. She did not address joining a fire district in that reply; a second note the same day said she supports moving toward a fire district shared with Fairview, Wood Village and Troutdale, and her levy entry now records both answers. Excerpts appear on her brief, and the replies are kept on file.

September 23, 2026 · Candidate response: John McDonald (District 4)

John McDonald wrote that he fully supports the City’s current Moda Center proposal, which he describes as $120 million up front and $275 million in ongoing maintenance over a 20-year lease, and expects other revenue to follow the teams’ success. His Moda board entry, a partial reading of his pamphlet statement, now records that support, and his bills column gained a “how” step. The reply is kept on file.

September 23, 2026 · Third candidate response: Tom Sollitt (District 3)

Tom Sollitt answered the three questions the Lab emailed him on September 19, completing his replies. On budget targets, he would not set numbers before knowing what the City can afford and what staffing is behind each service, but says every major service should have a baseline, a target, an owner and a cost, and that any request for more money should name the improvement residents should expect. On climate and the environment, he supports continued Clean Energy Fund investment in clean energy, efficiency, electrification and resilience, less dependence on fossil fuels including the risks of the Critical Energy Infrastructure Hub, tree canopy protection, and public disclosure with no NDAs for energy-intensive projects such as data centers. He describes founding the Legendary Makers Market in 2023 and the I Hope You Get Rich pitch competition in 2025, each started with no budget, with press coverage he cites.

The reply appears as three excerpts on his brief and is cited among his sources; his grid positions, which already cited his September 22 reply, did not change. The Lab has not independently verified the attendance and vendor figures. The reply is kept on file, and his preservation hash was re-recorded.

The same day, his portrait was replaced with the photo on his campaign site, TomForPDX.com, in place of the voters’ pamphlet photo.

September 22, 2026 · Second candidate response: Cristal Otero (District 3)

Cristal Otero answered all eight questions in the Lab’s follow-up. On safety, she would focus resources on the smaller group of people repeatedly cycling through the street, shelters, emergency rooms and jail, assigning Street Response teams to high-contact areas and strengthening jail-release handoffs. On bills, she would set a five-year goal of cutting the inflation-adjusted cost of water service at least 5%. On climate, she would tie Clean Energy Fund reporting to the city’s transportation emissions goals. On the Council’s choices, she supports renovating the Moda Center but would seek Metro and private money before Portland fills the gap; she would keep camp removals for serious hazards but shift some of that program into Parks; she would put stronger conditions on large data centers; she supports a 24-hour Street Response inside the county’s existing crisis system; and she is skeptical of the street repair fee, pointing to the General Fund first.

Her safety, money and climate columns now have “how” and “measured by” steps citing this reply; the earlier pamphlet measures for safety and money were replaced by the ones she gave us. Five topic boards, empty before, now have entries. Excerpts appear on her brief, the reply is kept on file, and her preservation hash was re-recorded.

September 22, 2026 · Correction at the candidate’s request: John McDonald (District 4)

John McDonald asked that his page stop calling him a former journalist, because he still works as one. His background now reads “TriMet hydro technician and journalist.” He wrote that answers to the Lab’s questions are coming. His preservation hash was re-recorded.

September 22, 2026 · Second candidate response: Timothy (TJ) Anderson (District 4)

TJ Anderson answered five of the Council’s choices in a word or two, noting that he did not want to lock in positions from a full list. He answered yes to public money for the Moda Center renovation at no more than $60 million, yes to keeping camp-removal funding at current levels, yes to restricting new AI data centers, no to a 24/7 Street Response “not without additions,” and no to raising water bills for the filtration plant. On the street repair fee, he wrote that he needs more information and will not give a short answer.

Five topic boards, empty before, now carry those answers in his words, and his reply appears as one excerpt on his brief. His “how” and “measured by” steps did not change. The reply is kept on file, and his preservation hash was re-recorded.

September 22, 2026 · Second candidate response: Keir Legree (District 3)

Keir Legree answered all seven questions in the Lab’s follow-up. On housing, he would explore letting Clean Energy Fund money acquire, build or preserve affordable housing that meets strong energy and carbon standards, and would buy existing apartment buildings when that is faster and cheaper than building. On streets, he would judge results by fewer traffic deaths and serious injuries, with reasonable bus and car travel times and little diversion onto neighborhood streets, and would have PBOT publish before-and-after results for major redesigns. On the Council’s choices, he supports Street Response but would add police officers before a 24/7 expansion; he wants the Blazers kept but opposes spending hundreds of millions of public dollars on the Moda Center, and would explore transferring the arena to the team’s new owner for an agreement to stay at least 20 years; he would hold the line on new taxes and fees; he supports restricting new AI data centers; and he would keep the street repair fee only if PBOT shows it is necessary and effective.

His rent and homes column gained a “how” step and his streets column a “measured by” step, both citing this reply. Five topic boards changed: Moda, new taxes, data centers and the street fee, empty before, now have entries, and his Street Response entry, a partial reading of his platform, now records the conditional answer he gave us. His reply also notes that the City acquired the arena for $1 in 2024, which the City’s August 2, 2024 fact sheet on the Moda Center bridge agreement confirms; the City separately paid $7.13 million for a parcel of land beneath part of the arena. His open question now asks what would pay for more officers and dispatchers if taxes and fees hold. Excerpts appear on his brief, the reply is kept on file, and his preservation hash was re-recorded.

Correction, September 23, 2026: an earlier version of this entry said the Lab had not verified the $1 figure and left it off his page. The City’s fact sheet confirms it, and his Moda entry and excerpt now include it.

September 22, 2026 · Candidate response: John Sweeney (District 3)

John Sweeney answered the three questions the Lab emailed him on September 19. On moving homeless services to Multnomah County, he points to Resolution A of 1983, under which the County took over jails, bridges and welfare services, and says federal and local funding would follow the services so the transfer could be seamless. On housing, he would start from the incomes of the people to be housed and build to the price they can afford, pointing to low-cost designs such as Quonset houses, which he says can cost under $4,000. He describes 33 years with Portland Parks, where he says many of his temporary employees became permanent, and 28 years in the Army Guard and Reserve, rising from private to captain.

His rent and homes column, empty before, now has a position with a “how” step citing the reply, and his background line reflects his Parks and military service. His open question now asks which agreement among the City, the County and Metro would carry out the transfer, and on what timeline. Excerpts appear on his brief; they correct spelling and punctuation only. His reply does not address the Council’s eight choices, which the Lab asked about in a separate follow-up the same evening. The reply is kept on file, and his preservation hash was re-recorded.

September 22, 2026 · Candidate response: Tom Sollitt (District 3)

Tom Sollitt replied to the Lab’s follow-up with an answer to every gap on his page. On housing, he would put preserving existing affordable housing first, use current Housing Bureau staff, press other governments and partners to share costs, and score each major Housing Bureau investment by its full City cost and results. On safety, he would have Council adopt a plan in his first year setting which calls go to police, Fire and EMS, Street Response, CHAT or the County. He would restore the Auditor’s performance-audit capacity in his first budget before asking for new revenue, and would maintain streets before starting new projects. On the Council’s choices, he says he would have voted no on the Moda Center term sheet, supports restricting new AI data centers and would eliminate the street repair fee. His answers on camp-removal funding, a 24/7 Street Response and water rates each come with conditions, and the page records them as mixed.

His four issue positions and their “how” and “measured by” steps now cite the reply, and his streets, buses and air column, empty before, has a position. Six topic boards changed. His Moda entry had been a partial reading of a May 11 post; it now records the no he gave us. His police-staffing and new-taxes entries still cite his campaign site, which the reply does not contradict. Excerpts appear on his brief, and the reply is kept on file. He wrote that more answers will follow. His preservation hash was re-recorded.

September 22, 2026 · Campaign correction: Mitch Green (District 4)

Leslie McCollom Fontaine, Mitch Green’s campaign manager, wrote that his “Camps, crime and who responds” column read “Not found in the sources we reviewed” although his support for Portland Street Response appears on his campaign’s record page and on his City council office pages. She was right. His Street Response work was already on the Street Response board, cited to that record page, while the column beside it stayed blank. The column now carries the position from his office’s September 16, 2026 statement: protect and expand Street Response, defend unarmed first responders against budget cuts, and protect the Office for Community Police Accountability. Its “how” step cites his record page, which describes funding to restart an independent evaluation of Street Response and a set-aside fund to add staff as the program moves to 24/7.

We then checked every Council candidate for the same mismatch. Two more District 3 columns were blank while a board carried a police-staffing statement from the candidate’s own 2026 material: Kimberly Tucker’s, from her campaign site, and Martin Ward’s, from his pamphlet statement. Both columns now show those statements. Kent Landgraver’s safety statements come from a 2024 questionnaire, so they stay on the boards and out of his column, which tracks positions for this election. Council office pages on portland.gov now carry the label “Council office” rather than “City filing.” The three candidates’ preservation hashes were re-recorded.

September 22, 2026 · Every race: what it decides, and where each candidate stands on it

Readers told us the topic columns were unusable: with every topic added, the governor’s grid ran to 2,472 pixels, half of it off-screen, and an opened chip showed an empty panel whose text sat a screen to the left. Each topic is now a board beneath the grid: the question, who is on record, and, open, every candidate A–Z with the recorded vote or our short reading, the sentence and the source. The four grid columns keep their ids for every race but are worded for the office (the county’s “Homelessness and housing” and “Crisis care, jail and deflection”; the state’s “Taxes, the kicker and the budget”), and “What’s at stake” now sits between the grid and the boards on every race, including the two Council districts, which had none.

The same day we swept every candidate in every race for statements on those choices: campaign sites and pamphlet statements, the Secretary of State’s filed statements, questionnaires (OPB, Willamette Week, Portland Mercury, City Club, 350PDX, Ballotpedia), forums and podcasts with readable transcripts, board and council minutes, floor and roll-call votes for sitting officials, and reported quotes. Before the sweep, 40 of the 48 races had no topics and no stakes block. After it, every race has both: 106 topics across the six kinds of office, 556 explicit stances (170 of them recorded votes or actions cited to the official record, 33 reported quotes, the rest the candidate’s own published words), and sourced stakes for all 48 races. Multnomah County’s list grew from nine topics to thirteen and now leads with the shelter cuts, the city-county agreement, the supportive housing tax and homeless-services oversight.

A new label, “partial,” records a statement that speaks to a topic but not to the exact choice the topic asks; its sentence says what it leaves unsaid, and the board marks it. John McDonald’s “Modernize Moda Center” is the model: his statement wants the arena modernized and the Blazers kept but says nothing about public money, so it had been left as a gap under the strict rule while the same words sat in his money column. 186 stances carry the label. Statements that named only a value or a broad goal (“restore public order,” “manage money like a household”) were not recorded, and seventeen such entries were removed in review. Where a candidate’s only statement on a topic is a 2024 questionnaire, the sentence says “in 2024.” Every entry is reviewedBy pending. The nine sweep reports, with the venues checked for each candidate, the questions left for each campaign and each agent’s “least sure” list, are in the repository under research/voters-guide-2026/outreach-2026-09-22; nothing has been sent to any campaign.

September 22, 2026 · Every researched race, in the Council format

Published the 46 races researched on September 18 that had stayed behind the allowlist: governor, U.S. Senate, all six U.S. House districts, Multnomah, Washington and Clackamas county seats, the Portland City Auditor, thirteen legislative districts and thirteen city races. Each uses the same race page and brief as the Council races. Research for these candidates was brought up to the Council standard from the county pamphlets on file and the campaigns’ own sites: four-issue positions with sources, chips and lines, how and measured-by rungs, a verbatim opening under the same rule, campaign contacts and portraits. Gaps remain gaps, and each pack’s outreach draft lists them. The recorded-votes panels remain Council-only; other incumbents’ recorded actions appear as public record on their briefs. The Secretary of State posted every filed candidate statement on September 9, ahead of the printed pamphlet, so statewide and legislative openings quote those statements by page.

Seven September 18 research gaps closed on the candidate’s own material and their profiles were rewritten from it: Patrick Walsh (Lake Oswego; a Clackamas pamphlet statement the Multnomah-only review had missed), Shawne Martinez (Tigard; campaign site), Chris Henry (U.S. Senate; filed statement), Andrea Townsend (U.S. House 5; her party’s questionnaire), John A N Chee and Brian Schimmel (Oregon Senate 17 and House 29; Ballotpedia surveys they completed) and Pat Hubbell (House 40; campaign site). Kimberly Culbertson (Hillsboro Ward 3) keeps her research gap: her only site still presents an earlier county candidacy, so nothing is quoted for this race. Four candidates have no published statement anywhere (Gary Lyndon Dye, Loran Ayles, Tim E Nelson, Daniel Miller); their rows say so.

September 21, 2026 · Candidate response: Steve Novick (District 3)

Steve Novick’s campaign replied on his behalf, with his answers, to the individual questions the Lab emailed him on September 19, 2026. On the July budget votes, he says Services First spent money the city should be counting on to balance next year’s already tough budget, and that restoring cuts to police training, such as de-escalation and emergency driving, was essential; that explanation now appears in his own words on the July restoration decision, where our reading of the record stood before. For his past work he pointed to the red flag law (a City presentation file), the 2016 city gas tax (OPB and the Portland Tribune), two federal Superfund cost-recovery decisions he says he led as a lawyer, and the 2010 Measures 66 and 67 campaign (The Oregonian); those are now listed among his sources with notes on what each establishes. He did not understand our first question, which read as a choice between unarmed response and camp removal; we have restated it as two questions and await his answer.

His brief shows the excerpts under “Their answers to our questions.” No issue position changed. The response is kept on file and cited with this entry; his preservation hash was re-recorded because his source list grew.

September 20, 2026 · Candidate response: Eli Arnold (District 4)

Eli Arnold replied to the individual questions the Lab emailed him on September 19, 2026. On revenue, he says there would be no immediate increase to police funding, that he would seek more authorized positions once vacancies are filled if the budget can accommodate it, and that fareless transit would draw on a portion of future Clean Energy Fund revenue (he notes TriMet’s fares are about $60 million a year, only part of it Portland). For his policing work he described a 2023 partnership with federal prosecutors against high-volume downtown fentanyl dealers and the Provider Police Joint Connection Program with the Bike Squad and MHAAO, and pointed to reporting in The Oregonian, KATU and OPB, now listed among his sources with a note on what each report does and does not establish.

His police-staffing stance now cites the reply for its sequencing; his brief shows the excerpts under “Their answers to our questions.” No issue position changed. The response is kept on file and cited with this entry; his preservation hash was re-recorded because his source list grew.

September 19, 2026 · Candidate response: Cristal Otero (District 3)

Cristal Otero replied to the individual questions the Lab emailed her on September 19, 2026. Her response specifies the resident ownership proposal her pamphlet statement sketched: a pathway for roughly 5–20% of the Housing Bureau’s regulated affordable rentals (about 950 to 3,800 homes today) to move to limited-equity cooperatives over time, aimed at households at 0–30% of area median income, beginning with publicly owned or financed buildings whose residents want it; the co-op carries the financing, residents buy a subsidized membership share, resale follows an affordability formula, and buildings get capital-needs assessments first. She also described her government work: Fairview’s pandemic small-business grants, early implementation of the Metro Supportive Housing Services measure at Multnomah County, the first tri-county joint social-services procurement, and cross-department Supportive Housing Services agreements since 2024.

Her housing position, chip and ladder rungs now cite the reply; her brief shows excerpts under “Their answers to our questions.” The reply answers her open question, which was replaced with the one it leaves open. The response is kept on file and cited with this entry; her preservation hash was re-recorded.

September 19, 2026 · Candidate response: Timothy (TJ) Anderson (District 4)

T.J. Anderson replied to the individual questions the Lab emailed him on September 19, 2026. His response names three policies with cost estimates (a value-based audit of city spending and assets capped at $5 million, with no new taxes or fees until it is done; 100 hours of volunteer work a year per councilor; a Council pay-and-benefits freeze until average salaries and jobs have grown for two full years) and gives positions on housing, public safety, homelessness, city spending and revenue, climate and transportation that his pamphlet statement did not cover. He also described his committee work and attached documents in support: the Multnomah County Department of County Assets and Management community budget advisory committee reports for FY26 (listing him as a member) and FY27 (listing him as co-chair), the Central CBAC FY26 report, the Portland State tuition recommendation flyer for 2026–27, and the TriMet Committee on Accessible Transportation 2026 annual report (listing him as a member).

His grid row now has four documented positions instead of none, with ladder rungs and two topic stances drawn only from the reply; his brief shows excerpts under “Their answers to our questions.” The response and attachments are kept on file and are not republished; the site cites them with this entry. Because his research object changed, the preservation baseline was re-recorded for his profile only.

September 19, 2026 · Candidate response: Keir Legree (District 3)

Keir Legree replied to the identical questions the Lab emailed every candidate on September 19, 2026. His response adds positions his pamphlet statement did not cover (housing production and preservation; transportation and emissions) and detail on infrastructure costs (competitive bidding, independent estimates, scope control, peer-city comparisons) and homelessness (shelter and treatment capacity, accountability for spending, and a proposed one-year pause on cash bottle redemptions as a measured experiment). It also answers his open question about cutting costs without deferring maintenance.

His brief now shows excerpts under “In their words,” his grid row has four documented positions instead of two, and our reading was updated to reflect the mechanisms he named. The response is kept on file; the site cites it with this entry. Because his research object changed, the preservation baseline was re-recorded for his profile only.

September 19, 2026 · The race page becomes one screen per race

Rebuilt each race page around a single alphabetical list of every candidate with one short line each, four issue views that swap the line in place, four featured Council votes phrased as the question Council decided, and a private, reader-ordered “My ballot.” Candidate briefs and the full Council record moved to their own pages so a phone no longer downloads the whole research edition to read one screen. District 3 previously shipped about 48,800 words on one URL.

Added a versioned short-line layer over the unchanged research: one short line per documented issue position, one choice paragraph per race, and explicit-statement placements beneath each featured vote. Every line names the field it was shortened from and is exported with the evidence. These lines are AI-drafted and awaiting separate human review; each carries a review status in the export. Owner decision, September 19, 2026: the issue views (chips) shipped before human review, with that status disclosed on the page; the design’s rule that chips wait for a reviewer name was amended to record this. Research objects, decisions and sources did not change; the preservation baseline still applies.

Retired the paginated topic browser, the pairwise comparison studio and the alignment-quiz remnants from the race page. We configure our analytics not to receive URL fragments. Updated the editorial standards to describe the new page and the reader-owned list.

September 18, 2026 · Complete the Council topic audit

Expanded the comparison to 73 decisions across 29 issues, covering all 24 subjects in the Council site’s topic index. Added transportation funding, water borrowing and rates, Street Response, police oversight, arts-tax reform, climate investments, permitting, parks, trees, privacy, infrastructure, governance and the pending firearms and psychedelics proposals. The broader vote-index scan also brought in labor contracts, Children’s Levy grants, officer identification, campaign finance, storefront support and animal welfare.

Separated the two contested police-board removal votes from the unanimous remainder of that report. Distinguished Bull Run borrowing from annual water rates, the final three-in-90-days nuisance threshold from the original proposal, and the adopted staffing assessment from a 400-officer hiring commitment that it did not enact. Committee non-members are explicitly identified rather than counted as absent.

Added an issue selector, direct issue links and filters for individual records and candidate comparisons. Explanations of the proposals now appear before the candidate cards. Rewrote compressed budget and Zenith language, and added readings that show exceptions and changing coalitions rather than forcing candidates into fixed blocs.

September 18, 2026 · Budget priorities and the broader Council record

Expanded the opening comparison from three examples to seven topics and seventeen matched roll calls. Added the 2025 parks/police choice, three competing June 2026 restoration amendments, annual budget adoption, Zenith’s investigation and transfer debates, camp-removal funding, detention-facility fees, housing development charges, the small-business exemption and PSU/Keller planning.

Checked June amendment votes against the clerk’s archived roll-call sheets. These distinguish Novick’s smaller climate-interest proposal from Services First and Clark’s oversight-funding proposal. Budget summaries describe priorities across successive choices, with the underlying record available in chronological order.

Zenith coverage includes the February investigation’s findings and the pending September 23 reconsideration. Absences remain separate from opposition. Shared-ground examples and a wider topic map make the selection’s limits visible. Incumbent record entries now expand individually to keep mobile profiles manageable.

September 18, 2026 · Explain the disagreements

Added an immediate comparison of incumbents on the competing July budget packages, Moda negotiations and rent-setting software. Record entries now distinguish final votes, alternative proposals and amendments. The July comparison shows who supported the larger plan, who supported the smaller package, and who supported both.

Added individual explanations from office statements and attributed reporting, including the split over Moda rent and financial safeguards. Earlier statements retain their dates. Where a personal explanation was not established, the entry describes the documented action without inventing a motive. Replaced repeated caveats in incumbent briefs with concise evidence links and shared context.

September 18, 2026 · Issue comparison and deeper Council research

Added direct candidate selectors and mobile reading cards for governing values, housing, safety, money, climate and recorded decisions. Every candidate receives the same issue framework, including visible evidence gaps. Selections are temporary; there are no rankings or match scores.

Added issue-level evidence from twelve campaign websites, including Pham’s rendered issue pages, which resolve the previous current-platform retrieval gap. His policy claims remain attributed rather than treated as verified outcomes. Expanded the same record check for all six incumbents from one to four final actions, including the July service-restoration budget and the September data-center resolution. Distinguished enacted rules, temporary funding, negotiating frameworks and statements of future intent.

September 18, 2026 · Council publication

Released the District 3 and District 4 Council guide as a working research edition. The public directory, race pages, evidence export and sitemap include these two races only. Other research described below remains unpublished.

September 18, 2026 · Research development

Built the candidate briefs from official candidate registers, county pamphlets and campaign sources. Recorded the same final Moda term-sheet vote for all six Portland council incumbents and the same final House action on H.R. 1 for all six congressional incumbents.

Checked the statewide field against qualified general-election filings. Consolidated multiple party nominations into one candidate entry. Included candidates who did not submit pamphlet statements, rather than treating pamphlet participation as the ballot roster.

Disclosed older campaign material and failed source retrievals. Left unsupported policy summaries blank. At that research cutoff no campaign had been contacted. On September 19, 2026, individual emails were sent to all 33 candidates in the published Council races, inviting corrections and asking about specific research gaps. Separate human editorial review remains incomplete.

Expanded legislative research to eight Senate and five House districts. Checked party cross-nominations against the narrowed official filing snapshot. Added current candidate statements outside county pamphlets, including campaign websites and published questionnaire responses.

September 18, 2026 · Portland portraits and filing review

Added source-credited portraits for 31 of 33 Council candidates and the auditor, with equal-size frames and placeholders for missing images. Added McCormick’s limited 2026 filing statement, Pham’s current occupational background and explicitly historical 2024 answers, and Goldsmith’s amended 2026 background. These additions do not close the three candidates’ broader policy-research gaps.

Corrections

What candidates tell us is logged above under the date we received it. This section records additions or removals of important content after publication, not drafting changes made before a page went live.

September 22, 2026: Mitch Green’s “Camps, crime and who responds” column wrongly read “Not found” while his Street Response position was on the page’s own board; the column now shows it, and the same check filled Kimberly Tucker’s and Martin Ward’s safety columns from statements already on the page. Details are in the entry for that date above.

September 19, 2026: corrected the District 3 neighborhood heading from “Inner Southeast” to “Southeast and inner Northeast,” since the City’s list for the district includes Northeast neighborhoods such as Rose City Park.

Submit a sourced correction · Download the briefs and evidence links (JSON)