City Council candidates spar over Frashour ruling, fluoride fight
»Play Video
PORTLAND, Ore. – Voters got to see candidates for City Council, incumbent Amanda Fritz and her challenger state Rep. Mary Nolan, appear simultaneously on "Your Voice, Your Vote" Sunday in a kind of "mini-debate."
Nolan touted both her legislative and managerial experience as the reason Portlanders should elect her to the City Council.
"That's the combination of skill that I bring that would add value to the City Council that's not there now," she said.
Fritz said she's proven she's been effective on the council and has gotten citizens involved in the process.
"I'm an independent voice, and yet I have proven that I can get along with the four diverse people who are on the City Council," she said.
The two candidates debated the two contentious issues the City Council has faced in recent weeks – the order to reinstate fired Portland Police Bureau Officer Ronald Frashour and the council's vote to add fluoride to the city's drinking water.
City Commissioners voted unanimously last week to appeal the rulings of an arbitrator and the state Employment Relations Boards that ordered the city to give Frashour his job back after the fatal shooting of an unarmed Aaron Campbell in January 2010 that resulted in Frashour’s dismissal from the Portland Police Bureau.
Fritz said there is a question in the interpretation of the law that needs to be resolved and the city owes "it to Aaron Campbell's family to ask the appeals court to take another look at the arbitrator's ruling."
Nolan, while not explicitly answering whether she would have voted for appeal if she had been on the council, said she feared pressing the issue would "further divide the community and not prevail at the (state) Court of Appeals."
Both Nolan and Fritz agreed that adding fluoride to the city's water makes sense and will provide a health benefit to Portlanders. But both questioned how the process played out.
Fritz was in England for a family member's wedding when the issue came to a head in Portland.
"From England, I was calling and asking, could we - I felt we should refer it to the vote in the first place ... I couldn't get another member – not even one other member of the council was willing to do the referral from the council, so I didn't make that motion at council," she said.
"I think the council should make the decision," said Nolan. "But I think council should make it in a way that invites real participation – not just in a yes or no – but in how we shape the implementation of the proposal, and I didn't see that happening."
The council ultimately voted to add fluoride to the water but a group of concerned citizens is working to refer the decision to voters and say they've collected enough signatures to do so. But the authentication of those signatures still needs to be verified.
To watch the full "mini-debate" between the two candidates, click on the above "Play Video" button above.
Candidates' websites:
Ok, here is where I lose it. Fluoride has been pushed all over the country, I have lived all my life in the 2 cities that did not use Fluoride in the water - San Jose, CA and Portland, OR. I have not always have had the best dental practices or sugar intake all my life so lets just call say I'm the norm with society that the 2 candidates are concerned about. and yet my teeth aren't falling out at 42.
While people are passionate on both sides of the issue please explain when Portland has voted this option in their water , it was voted down. For some reason if you look at the transcripts of the city council discussion they had already made their mind up that Portland was not only going forward with a non-public vote but that Portland was spending crucial dollars and making this happen and all on the council was very hardened that it was going to happen no matter what..
In a time when funding for teachers who can help parents fortify proper eating and dental practices, Portland has a council that wants to take full control and allow teachers be cut but spend money on fluoride.
Please tell me how this is so important to get rushed through without public voting? when it failed before?
Even if you want Fluoride in your water , how as a concerned Oregonian can you not see the misuse of the power of a few affect so many who can not have their voice heard. Plainly they know this would fail if it went to public vote again and yet these 2 candidates and the council believe they have a right over you and me to make this decision.
We should all be concerned that the way this is being handled is so wrong. Ask yourself. why does the council need to push this through without public vote, even when other water districts downstream didn't have a vote on this? Who is really behind this push to get this passed? Who benefits financially from this being passed?
After Fluoride is forced (literally) down Oregonians throats what will be the next issue that will be passed without voter consensus? Even if you strongly believe that we should force a change in oregon's natural water flow to benefit "the children", should you not also see why we have democracy that allows all voices on all issues to be heard, especially those that effect 100% of those that drink portland's water.
I think reasonable people will think that even if Fluoride may protect childrens teeth for the future it still should be voted on no matter what cuz that is how Oregonians do it. Love us or hate us, we at least vote as a society and we all accept the the decision from a vote. Not what is being by bypassed voters. Now the council is verify that the signatures are valid ..... sounds like they are trying to find a way to still push this through and force their will onto others. If they don't bring this to a vote, Portland you are held responsible for allowing the few to affect the many.
Portland's #1 mayoral candidate Tre Arrow would NEVER allow the people's water to be poisoned with that extremely toxic fluoride additive....
Voting for either of these two candidates is a lose lose situation, both of them have an attitude of superiority that they know best what government should do to you. Unfortunately this is an attitude of government in Portland in its entirety.
Fritz is an elitist from England and wants to reshape our society in the English manner which of course includes socialism and a virtual dictatorship from government. Even though she now says she supports a vote regarding fluoride in the water that only after it's clear there's enough signatures to force that issue to a vote after she initially voted for it on the Council.Â
Other things that the Council has voted for like $60 million for bicycle paths but no way are they willing to improve the streets for cars. Virtually every chance the city gets they blocked bridges or roads for the exclusive use of bicycles and pedestrians. Basically the intent here is to remove cars altogether one of the worst examples is Holgate Street in South East Portland.Â
 If only we could say the city Council lacks common sense that might be humorous but the fact is they must know what common sense is because they always go in the opposite direction.
Â
The city is being destroyed by the Council in terms of livability because of the costs involved with all the pet projects that are making it impossible to financially be sustained as a thriving city. Either this trend must be reversed and in aggressive warlike manner or this will become exclusively a city and perhaps the entire state of have and have-nots leaving only the ruling class to Lord over the rest of us.Â
 take notice that you have the highest water bill and the nation, the most expensive public transportation a city counsel that passes ordinances to manipulate business where the Council has no right to be except in a socialist country. biofuel, plastic bags, alternating week garbage pickup, not only a business license for taxi companies but an individual cab license, water run off fees, TryMet tax added to building permits over 5K. forcing tri-met to let students travel free. The seller can think of right now but who do you suppose ends up paying this cost?
Â
Ah, what this city needs is what the federal government has been strongly RECOMMENDING since 9/11. Covering our city's water reservoirs. Year in and year out - this city council ignores that RECOMMENDATION. And chooses instead to prioritize fluoridation. Ah, City Council - if our water source is not covered and kept safe  - and we keep on ignoring the critical NEED to do so - what difference does it make - if the water is fluoridated?Â
 @englishdaisy the federal government started recommending the reservoirs be covered back in the mid-70s at least according to the city but no one ever verified this. The response then was they completely took out the reservoir on the corner of division and 60th where now an apartment complex stands, the rest were taken off-line. Water is left in the reservoirs for the aesthetic value but it is not in the drinking water circuit since the mid-70s.Â
 Everything you hear about covering the reservoirs now is just a ploy to raise your rates even further.
Some years ago they bought plastic that was supposed to be used to cover the reservoirs but never used. After the plastic laid in a warehouse for some time this city put the plastic on eBay where promptly some city employees purchased it for a fraction of its cost. When that became public knowledge the sale was stopped but occurred later when there was less public awareness.Â
Â
nonetheless keep in mind you do not drink the water in any of the reservoirs that are open air.
Â
When these reservoirs were in use you could see the water level going up and down throughout the course of the day being refilled by a center Geiser that reintroduced oxygen into the water, that does not happen on a daily basis anymore for they only need to deal with evaporation, or the occasional urinating idiot.
 @ORthinker  @englishdaisyÂ
The water in the reservoirs is indeed water that gets sent to homes. This water has come from the treatment facility and goes right into the system and to pipes that lead to local homes (i.e. other than some passive filters nothing else is done to them).
Â
Both Mt. Tabor and Washington Park have open reservoirs that perform like this.
Â
My friend's father and my mother-in-law both work for PWB.
Â
Okay let's apply a little deductive reasoning here. Click on your own link and look at the picture. The bottom of the article says they clean the reservoirs every six months, the amount of moss that has grown on the outside edges of the reservoir pictured has definitely not been cleaned in the last six months because it takes over a year for that much moss to grow. I do pressure washing for a living and I know that to be true.Also when the reservoirs were in use back in the 70s the water level would change more than 10 feet in the course of the day two things in this pictures indicate that didn't happen in this reservoir. One is the moss would have been killed by the chlorine in the water if it was active chlorinated water being used. Second you would see a wet area indicating a decline in water level because of usage and there would be a geyser shooting water up in the middle of the reservoir refilling it. Under( Mount Tabor and Washington Park reservoirs ) it says the water Bureau maintains reservoirs in these locations not that it uses them.Then it follows by saying water flows from the Mount Tabor reservoir by gravity and yes it would if it was being used but they don't say that. It's a presumptive conclusion that you have reached that it is being used because of the wording that is been put on this page to mislead you.Read carefully and you'll see there's nothing that actually says these reservoirs are in use today, that's because they're not.
 @ORthinker  @englishdaisyÂ
Â
Â
Well the uncle of my best friend's sister had a guy from outside of DC who said that he overheard that the water IS INDEED used for drinking.
Â
Or I could just show you where the PWB says it is.
http://www.portlandoregon.gov/water/article/328963
Â
You donât' have to believe the rabbit, just believe the PWB.
Â
Course you don't HAVE to believe anything you see on the web never can trust a source.
Â
 @Repoman  @ORthinker  @englishdaisyÂ
oh really well a friend of a friend of somebody that was picked up hitchhiking from out-of-state told a rabbit that sent me a letter that said.
They're building a new reservoir on Powell Butte, back in the 70s they built a reservoir on Kelly Butte and there's reservoir on a Butte about 190th South of division and that's just the Eastside, I don't really know what's going on in the West side. Â But no they don't use the water on Mount Tabor except for the aesthetic value or possibly some major earthquake or fire.
 @ORthinker  @englishdaisy ORthinker - "keep in mind" indeed. You totally ignore the stated directed recommendations of the federal government post 9/11. And you choose instead to suggest progressive "intellects" have existed on the city council that were aware the reservoirs have needed to be covered since the 70's? Come on...
Â
YOUR delfections have nothing to do with the altered reality our nation exists in post 9/11 - and the ongoing directed terrorism and threats to the public and all things PUBLIC WATER - including totally incapacitating those reservoirs in open disruptive public threat manner and means that exists for all of us, too. POST 9/11.Â
Â
 Why do YOU chooose to deflect? .Because you are "in the know" inside of the city bureaucrasy and that is how it is done -  SINCE THE recommendations post 9/11 came out - in regard to "justifying" misappropriating public dollars to bike paths and baby sitting law breaking anarchists instead?
Â
Come on, ORthinker - When fluoridation could and should wait. And so should those bike paths - because our city's long over due public water source reservoirs NEED to be covered and protected now.Â
Â
 @englishdaisy  @ORthinkerÂ
Did you see this??
Â
The response then was they completely took out the reservoir on the corner of division and 60th where now an apartment complex stands, the rest were taken off-line. Water is left in the reservoirs for the aesthetic value but it is not in the drinking water circuit since the mid-70s
Â
the stated directed recommendations of the federal government post 9/11 don't matter when we do not drink the water.
Great. Â They both are clueless about fluoride. Â But wow, they sure will approve it. Â Thanks for bothering to read up on it. Â Nice to know all of the members were as willing to just yawn and pass it.
I left Portland forty years ago and haven't missed it one bit. Â Before then, it was a pretty good place to live. Â Not now, unless you are one of the weirdos that thrive on the type of crap Portland has become famous for and like living in the biggest embarrassment for a city on the west coast.
Â
An Inconvenient Tooth is a documentary film about fluoride. Â It was released September 6th, 2012 at the city hall in Portland, Oregon.
Â
http://AnInconvenientTooth.org
http://youtube.com/watch?v=sh-oeu2L8yM
@Guy Wagner Thank you for linking this. I can now only hope people inform themselves on this issue by means of their own research like many others I know have done.
To those of you Portlanders who resist being led around by the nose by government, you have my sympathy..! Â If I lived in Portland, I'd be looking around in another city to live in, too. Â Â
Â
As a city, you have already voted down fluoridated water several times; I hope you do it again. Â I think it's 100% wrong for the city council to force this on people, especially when fluoride is so readily available, for those who want it, in everyday products, eg: toothpaste and mouthwash, that are carried on the shelves of literally ANY supermarket or drugstore. Â Â
Â
You know, IMHO, it isn't that fluoride in the water, per se, is the worst possible thing they could do... but it's that government is, once again, trying to ramrod its own preferences into law, even if the people that it would affect do not want the change (and have, in fact, voted against it on several occasions). Â Â
Â
If they're allowed to do it with fluoride, what will be the NEXT thing they'll want? Â Â Seems like they're trying to set a dangerous precedent here...all in the name of leaving a "political legacy"...Â
Oh what wonderful choices we're presented with. Â I'm thinking my family and I are going to move out of Portland ASAP. Â While I enjoy being close to many activities like OMSI and the zoo for my kids--I'm tired of these liberal idiots cramming their notion of "what is right for the people" down my throat, while not addressing the pressing issues like our being raped by Water and Garbage for poor service, and so on. Â Portland is an urban hell.
 @Melissa Stidham-Clary PUhleez, it's not THAT bad.  Might I suggest rural Kansas?  You won't have to worry about big bad government blowing down your door out there.Â
Both are losers who think that citizens don't know what is best for themselves. Either one will continue with the current direction of the city and keep forcing us to think their way.
 @RalphCramden Yes, worry about the water and adding something that will have little effect.... I mean it isn't like there's any other pressing matters.... These are some of the reasons I left Oregon... friggin' ridiculous...Â
 @Funky-Munky  @RalphCramden Little effect funky munky There gonna spend over 5 million   did you hear me fucky munky  5 MILLION PLUS Tell your wife funky munky you want to spend 5 grand without her consent and see how little she thinks that is...
 @Funky-MunkyÂ
Yea, that's a high priority for the city right now. Spend more money we don't have.
Two politically correct, born-again, knee-jerk, limousine liberals. Great choice we're given. That's Democrary, Portland style.
Ms. Nolan - let me be explicit - if you expect to be elected and work AGAINST the will of a unanimous city council and pursue retaining Ronald Frashour as a Portland Police Officer - that will be a decision on your part against the law abiding, peaceful citizens of your city.
Â
In other words, Ms. Nolan, hon. No matter how many campaign dollars Portland's police union is dangling in front of you right now - inticing you to appear soft on Ronald Frashour - don't you dare do so. Or pursue any other path other than upholding the firing of Mr. Frashour.
Â
What has been done by the city concil is DONE. The people are well pleased. And the police union and Chief Reese - need to uphold the will of the people. Keeping Ronald Frashour OUT of police work in Portland - permanently.
If fluoride is a health benefit, then why did Sweden, Holland, Finland, France, Germany, Japan, and even Britain suspend it's use?
Because in our country capitalism comes first, then maybe democracy if we have time.. There is an industry for fluoride, 3M stopped producing Sodium Fluoride for various reasons. DuPont on the other hand took advantage of this and had ramped production. Various studies have shown their workers and people in neighboring areas have higher volumes of Sodium Fluoride in their systems and with adverse affects.  The evidence against fluoridation is mountainous and for anyone to boldly dismiss it is someone who not only doesnât take democracy or evidence seriously but they are willing to ignore it at the potential cost of harming millions.  Â
Â
The argument that a lot of the other states and cities do it is not a valid one, this only proves  the credulity of the rest of the country â not here.  As others have stated there are various places around the world now that through review of the evidence found that not only was fluoridation harmful but itâs unethical â these are well established countries I might add â with a health respect for evidence!
Â
Regardless, itâs unethical to force medicate. We all have that right to choose.Â
Â
Finally Iâm tired of the old argument that "it's for the kids". What they mean to say is this is for the credulous.
 @OliverNicholas I hear ya.  I've been on a sugar free diet for over a year and had some ice cream last night.  It messed me up!  Sugar is a drug and should be regulated like tobacco, it is very harmful.  If you want a single great cause for bad teeth, look at what the poor people eat vs. the rich people.  You can buy a can of soda for $1 vs. 5 carrots for the same price.  The bad food is subsidized while the good healthy food is not.
@portlandborn83 @OliverNicholas It's not poor people vs. rich people. It's smart people vs. stupid people who do whatever the TV commercials tell them to do.
 @portlandborn83 Or better yet, why add something to the water that is readily available at any corner store.
Â
Fluoride in the water will do nothing for those who practice poor oral hygiene!