Bob Tiernan
Lake Oswego
Businessman, Consultant, Attorney
The Oregon governor’s office is usually reactive when it comes to dealing with drought. What specific steps would you take to provide long-term solutions for years of increasing drought?
Mark Twain’s famous comment, “Water is for fighting. Whisky is for drinking” still applies today because the foundation of much of what we do in Oregon depends on our state’s most valuable natural resource—water! Whether it’s traditional industries like agriculture that need water for crops or modern-day high-tech in the Columbia Gorge which require lots of water for cooling data centers the state needs to focus on for positive solutions.
I would look at current sources, such as preventing the destruction of our dams and reservoirs, working with tribes and conservation groups to mitigate any ongoing concerns about threatened species or habitat. Increase conservation measures and turn to the experts for more water storage options where possible. As governor I would also enhance efforts to build more reservoirs and other ways to capture water and deliver it where it’s needed. Perhaps we can encourage conservation with tax credits for water recovery from residential and commercial rooftops. There could be opportunities to build salinization plants along Oregon’s coastline. One of the things I’ve done in my business consulting career is turn to experts for answers on various topics.
As governor I would do the same on this and other topics. Bring in the stakeholders, experts on drought conditions, farmers, weather, soil, aquifer, habitat and other professionals; together we can find answers.
In the absence of action by the legislature, Gov. Brown created a climate protection plan by executive order to reduce carbon emissions. That plan is being challenged in court. If elected, would you renew that order or rescind it? Why?
I wouldn’t renew the current governor’s cap and trade executive order and I would rescind programs already in place that hurt Oregon businesses and families. We all want (to) help our environment and reduce the impact of climate change, but government leaders need to watch for unintended consequences of their actions. That means watching out for Oregonians’ livelihoods, pocketbooks, their ability to heat their homes, and other activities.
The state agencies running new bureaucracies for the governor’s orders are imposing new limits on greenhouse gas emissions on Oregon’s largest energy producers. Translation? Once fully implemented, the cost of electricity, natural gas, and transportation fuel will go up even more as a result. Not only will homeowners pay the price, but also farmers who run tractors to produce crops, and the list goes on and on. How many additional businesses will flee to a state without these unreasonable rules?
The process is also a concern of mine. This governor enacted the executive order despite tens of thousands of Oregonians protesting at rallies and testifying the state capitol. Dozens of lawmakers boycotted the legislative session in protest and there was a huge push to send the issue to a statewide vote. However, the governor imposed this massive policy change over all those objections. This is no way to enact policy of this magnitude.
With technological innovations and looking at what other states are doing, I’m confident Oregon can find other proactive ways to reduce emissions with less impact on energy costs. Some groups like Timber Unity suggested tax incentives for companies to install more energy efficient equipment, upgrade recycling of manufacturing materials, and reducing the amount of road travel by state agencies.
In addition to climate change, scientists throughout the state have raised concerns that Oregon’s reliance on “clearing fuel” as a form of forest management contributes to worsening conditions. Conversely, timber industry groups continue to champion industrially planted forests and timber harvests as an important tool in suppressing wildfires. What stakeholders would you include in conversation as you develop your forest management policy?
The governor is only one leader among many when it comes to dealing with causes and solutions surrounding Oregon’s wildfire issues. Forest management is a multi-jurisdictional topic involving state, federal, regional and local government, as well as private landowners. In addition, there are others to consider that often make their interests known in the court system, permit appeals and so on.
Oregon has experienced some of the worst fire seasons in history over the past few years. While we debate the reasons looking for answers, as Oregon’s next governor, I’ll open to hearing all sides on important issues like this. At the end of the day, I’m not going to do as the current governor and lean way over to one side and shut out the concerns of others.
While not listing specific groups name (because I don’t want any to feel left out) I’d have discussions with forest researchers, timber and logging interests, wildlife and habitat experts, tribal leaders, conservationists, weather and firefighting specialists, homebuilding professionals, power companies, campground and parks managers, federal, state and local agency representatives, public and private forest fire management experts, as well as wildland firefighter trainers. There may be others to add to this short list, but these representatives are a good start to help me, as governor and my new state agency executives move forward with procedures that can prevent and put out wildfires moving forward.
Measure 110 decriminalized drugs in Oregon while stepping up treatment. How would you confront the state’s failure to meet the intent of the law to ensure thousands of Oregonians get treatment?
Measure 110 needs to be repealed and to be put back on the ballot ASAP. By the time I’m governor, Oregonians will have had a chance to judge for themselves the consequences of this failed liberal policy which includes out of control drug use (including more teen addiction), collateral crime, and increased homelessness. If not a statewide vote, then I will push for a legislative overhaul. We need carrots and sticks to provide assistance to those who need it and hold drug users and state agencies accountable.
This misguided measure is harming those it was meant to help and others victimized by its implementation. Voters across the state tell me they were sold Measure 110’s bill of goods, feeling sorry for low-level drug users, hoping they would get treatment.
Instead, I can count on both hands and feet the number of individuals who actually requested treatment through a hotline to avoid a $100 drug possession penalty. This isn’t about a baggie of pot; Measure 110 decriminalized certain amounts of hardcore drugs including heroin, cocaine, meth and oxycodone.
Some cops don’t even issue tickets because many offenders fail to show for court? Meanwhile, others not on drugs face more property thefts and other crimes from the users feeding their habits.
Substance abuse and mental health services were already severely lacking, so it’s shameful state leaders didn’t provide more support before the measure started. Addicts now have even more problems finding help because the state is just now trickling out nearly $300 million to providers.
Ironically, Measure 110 funding was intended for additional not current substance abuse services. Yet, the money for 110 is coming out of the legal marijuana revenues and diverted from existing drug abuse programs, state police, local government s and schools.
What state action would you direct to confront the threat to health and safety posed by fentanyl?
I would leave no stone unturned; our children deserve no less. This includes reducing harm, boosting law enforcement, assisting communities, and public awareness without more taxes and fees.
The current governor proclaims emergencies for nasty weather, but not when kids are dying from a lethal synthetic poison they’re buying over social media. Sadly, governor Brown denied a request from top addiction doctors about the fentanyl crisis.
Children experimenting with drugs and adult addicts don’t know the dangers since counterfeit fentanyl pills are usually tasteless and odorless.
My emergency fentanyl declaration would involve several measures and potential funding from recent drug company opioid court settlements. These include distribution of Naloxone/Narcan kits in every police car, school building, health facility, and other places someone might potentially overdose from fentanyl or other opioids. Special fentanyl test strips should also be widely available to prevent overdoses.
The state helped reduce meth labs over the past few decades, and we can combat this deadly threat by cutting off the supply. State Police need more resources, along with local law enforcement and prosecutors, to investigate and lock up the perpetrators.
When violent crime caused a public safety emergency in Oregon, I didn’t sit by and take “no” for an answer. As Chair of the Crime Committee in the Oregon House, I co-sponsored Ballot Measure 11 implementing tougher sentences for serious felonies and crime dropped 50%. Watch for the same “can-do” attitude toward fentanyl.
A state strike team will be deployed when clusters of fatal or non-fatal overdoses are detected to help local health representatives with prevention efforts. Leading an awareness campaign as governor to help families is critical. Like most children, my grandkids will probably take risks at some point, but they should know the facts about this stuff that could kill them in seconds.
What steps would you take to address the stress of educators, students and parents and keep our public K-12 schools from imploding?
Many Oregon K-12 public schools are pressure cookers. Some have exploded with student fights; others have seen school board meltdowns over political agendas. Much of this stress in Oregon’s K-12 public schools was brewing pre-pandemic with lagging test scores, graduation rates, lack of mental health supports and other factors. As governor I would look for ways to relieve the tension for teachers, students and parents with solutions to befit all these partners in the learning process – especially students.
When COVID shutdowns happened, parents experienced a front-row seat to their children’s education during distance learning. Parents became empowered seeing how their children learned and what they were learning. Families know what is best for their kids, and parents should have the final say in their learning needs.
We should support our public schools while giving families more learning choices because competition is healthy in pushing for excellence in education. As governor, I will push for more access to charter schools, homeschooling assistance, online schools, vouchers and other education options.
The state can increase support for teachers by modifying all the extra duties, mandates and other things that prevent them from doing what they do best— teach kids. To ease staff shortages, perhaps students seeking college teaching degrees could be classroom aides or more incentives for teacher retention and recruitment.
The ones who’ve suffered most are the children. Oregon’s diploma has become a national joke, employers hire out-of-state workers because there aren’t enough home-grown skilled graduates. It’s time to get serious about giving our kids the tools needed to learn, whether it’s a reading specialist or advanced math. They only get one chance at an education. We must do better. As parents and grandparents, I think we all want that.
Do you believe that the K-12 system in Oregon should get involved in early childhood care to help provide more child care options and education, and if so, how?
Absolutely not. First, the public school system in Oregon is already struggling just to handle its current responsibilities. As discussed in previous questions, there aren’t enough teachers, counselors and other staff across the state to handle the load. We’ve seen enrollment dropping due to frustrated parents leaving the system. Schools are being pushed to provide full-day kindergarten, preschool, dual-college courses, health care, teen mom programs and other social services.
Why would the state want to pile another unfunded mandate on top of our already stressed-out school system and ask them to add day care for little ones? No thank you.
The privately-owned, non-profit in-home, neighborhood, church and child care centers and others have been the heart and soul of Oregon’s system for decades. Families I know value choices where they can decide if they want an intimate neighborhood feel or a more formal child care center in a commercial setting.
Is the current system perfect? Of course not. The existing providers have struggled even before the pandemic hit, due to low pay, lack of training, and other issues. Once coronavirus happened many families kept their kiddos home and that hurt many of these small operations, who waited sometimes months and months for financial aid from the state. Ironically several public schools were allowed to provide day care services often at no cost for low-income families, even though students were doing distance learning. I’m not sure how any of that made sense, but I’m glad it’s over.
What do you see as the two biggest barriers to creating an adequate supply of child care in Oregon, and what do you propose to change to help alleviate the shortage of child care?
Being governor is an important position, but job one for me every day is being a dad. As a father of three, grandfather to seven children, I know what we do for them matters; they are the future.
Helping families support their children and be able to go to work, knowing they have quality, affordable child care is something the state should be able to help figure out. From what I know, high turnover and low pay have plagued this profession for a long time and like many sectors, the pandemic exacerbated the problems. Are these barriers that we can overcome as a state? I hope so.
As I’ve mentioned before, I often seek advice from certified smart people that have answers in their areas of expertise. Gov. Tiernan would reach out to representatives from the child care industry, community colleges, high school programs, and other groups to gather ideas.
According to state employment experts, after many day care providers shut down or went out of business entirely during COVID, it’s been hard to scale back up and find skilled workers. In addition to fact-finding for solutions from industry experts, will work with legislative leaders to explore other options for getting more high-quality individuals to fill the shortage in the child care sector. I’ve heard one area of particular concern is specialized training for providers to care for high-needs children, so they may take some targeted attention.
Much of the economy of rural Oregon is based on agriculture, natural resource extraction and tourism. Agriculture is consolidating, natural resource extraction is in decline, and tourism provides mostly minimum-wage jobs. As governor, what are the first three steps you would take to build a stronger economy in rural Oregon?
Leadership: I’ve been a successful business leader by listening and learning. To build a stronger economy for rural Oregon, I want to understand the challenges. As governor, I pledge to set up my office for two weeks at a time in different geographical areas around the state each year. That way I can experience rural Oregon’s economic problems and possible solutions first-hand.
Agriculture Overtime: Although this law just passed, I hope by the time I’m governor, farmers, worker and advocates on both sides of the issue will have a crop season to consider the unintended consequences.
Rural farmers emerging from the pandemic now face skyrocketing fuel costs and shipping problems. This law may push farmers to cut production, go out of business, or leave the state. None of these options is good for Oregon’s rural economy.
The law is phased in over five years starting in 2023, so hopefully, there’ll be change I can push for in the 2023 legislative session. Administrative rule changes at the State Agriculture Department, or other agencies are also possible. I’ll help farmers as well as workers who don’t want their hours or wages cut as part of those unintended consequences.
Wolf Management: Rural ranchers, especially in Eastern Oregon need assistance through the wolf management compensation program. It established a decade ago after these predators were reintroduced to Oregon. I would appropriate at least $1 million from the legislature’s emergency fund or a special governor’s fund for this effort. … Most of the current funds were used for prevention or deterrence. We should encourage cattle ranching not send a message that rural Oregon is closed because wolves have taken over.
State government has a lot of tools to help the economy. Please rank the following to show your support, with 1 being the highest priory. Use 0 for any idea you do not support.
__ Targeted tax breaks for key industries
__ Direct financial aid to education/job training programs.
__ Direct financial aid to specific businesses
__ Infrastructure and public works, such as broadband and transportation?
__ Other (be specific)
0) Targeted tax breaks for key industries
1) Direct financial aid to education/job training programs.
0) Direct financial aid to specific businesses
1) Infrastructure and public works, such as broadband and transportation?
*) Other (be specific)
There are huge shortages of skilled workers for targeted areas such as health care, construction, tech, education, and other trades. The state can do more to boost apprenticeship, training and college programs to assist in getting qualified job applicants into the workforce where employers need to fill those positions.
Government should play a role in the basic infrastructure needs to encourage businesses to locate and expand in our state. But industry also needs to pay its fair share in partnership on large-scale projects. Broadband and similar access to technology, especially to keep small rural businesses and schools connected is especially critical for a healthy Oregon economy.
*I don’t believe it’s government’s job to pick winners and losers; it’s just not fair and we’ve seen the consequences recently. For example, large corporations such as Intel that receive huge tax breaks appeared to do well during the pandemic while many small businesses were closing up shop. Assistance was also earmarked for some small business owners the past couple years because the governor felt they were from certain historically disadvantaged populations and deserved special consideration, while others were left out.
What specific steps would you take to increase access to housing and housing stock for low and middle-income Oregonians?
So many steps, so little time. First I think the new governor needs to call a housing summit, like Gov. Goldschmidt did for worker’s comp. Only this time I may have to lock all the parties into the state fairgrounds for a couple of weeks because it’s that big of an issue involving so many different stakeholders.
Second, this incoming governor doesn’t like the idea that government has all the answers— seems like the laws of supply and demand often work better when it comes to housing. For example, Oregon imposed rent control but yet rents are up by 50% on average according to a recent annual survey. Other overregulation for climate change policies, energy efficiency rules, permit problems, and SDCs, all drive up costs for home builders. I’m sure these are all concerns would come up at the housing summit.
Finally, I would can deal with those concerns to increase access and affordability for low and middle-income housing. In addition, land use laws continue to be the biggest factor for many in this equation. Among other options, I support expanding a pilot program which allows for 50-acre extensions of the urban growth boundary using public-private partnerships to create more opportunities for affordable housing in limited cases around Oregon.
How would you support local efforts to provide designated places for unhoused Oregonians including overnight parking sites, tent camping sites and tiny homes? Would that support include seeking state funding?
Homelessness is a multifaceted problem. It’s turning our streets and neighborhoods into third-world-looking landscapes. It must stop. Allowing the homeless to live on the streets in squalor, is not being compassionate. Homeless individuals deserve better.
There is a lot of innovative thinking going on around the state to help craft short and long-term solutions to homelessness. As governor, I would support these local efforts to create options for homeless individuals such as tiny homes, and designating camping sites.
We should be doing more. I’m surprised that we haven’t resolved the proposal to utilize unused parking at the Portland Expo Center. I’m sure there are other large parking areas with non-profit organizations willing to assist in communities around the state. In my role as governor, I would explore possible state facilities and properties suitable for parking sites, or emergency shelters with necessary services.
My approach is to look for a short-term solution to get homeless campers off the streets and into more stable, safer, cleaner temporary shelter areas. I would then convene a special task force to propose a long-term action plan with a set timeline complete with measurable outcomes to resolve the issues facing the homeless population.
As for funding, I think it’s frustrating to fathom the hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars the state has spent in recent years on programs dealing with homelessness, yet the problem seems worse than ever in Oregon. In the Tiernan administration, there will be an audit of all those dollars and the results of that spending. Before we spend another dime there must be accountability measures in place for the funds allocated whether they are federal pass-through, state, or grants to local agencies.
The legislature has been working to make it easier to build more units of housing in cities, to close the gap between housing supply and demand. Has it gone far enough? Will you make it easier for cities to adopt practices allowing more rapid and more dense construction?
I mentioned in an earlier question the friction home builders often have when government mandates get in the way of supply and demand. One example of cities trying to increase density for affordable housing is inclusionary zoning in Portland, but many feel that may have only discouraged building new apartments. A recent statewide law allowing apartment buildings in single-family neighborhoods has many concerned about their property values, and overwhelmed infrastructures. The best of intentions may not have the desired results.
If elected governor, I would have to carefully consider each proposal to see if the supply of housing will actually go up. State leaders, like the governor, can often make housing more affordable by studying and listening to builders and contractors—they know the factors that are driving up the cost of housing. They also have ideas for how to attack those problems to drive down those costs. I think state government often gets in the way and allowing the private sector and non-profit organizations to step up can often produce creative solutions. At the end of the day what we’re doing now for housing affordability in Oregon isn’t working and we need to fix it.