REFERENCES
- 1000 Friends of Oregon. (1995a, January). People for planning. Landmark, 18–19. Portland, OR: Author.
- 1000 Friends of Oregon. (1995b, January). Planning for healthy communities. Landmark, 20–21. Portland, OR: Author.
- 1000 Friends of Oregon. (1995c, January). The importance of neighborhood vitality. Landmark, 22–23. Portland, OR: Author.
- 1000 Friends of Oregon. (1997). Making the connections: A summary of the LUTRAQ project. Portland: Author.
- Abbott, C. (1983). Portland: Planning, politics and growth in a 20th century city. Lincoln: University of Nebraska.
- Abbott, C. (1991). Urban design in Portland, Oregon, as policy and process: 1960–1989. Planning Perspectives (6), 1–18.
- Abbott, C., & Howe, D. (1993). The politics of land use law in Oregon: Senate Bill 100, twenty years after. Oregon Historical Quarterly, 94(1).
- Abbott, C., Howe, D. & Adler, S. (Eds.) (1994). Planning the Oregon way: A twenty-year evaluation. Corvallis: Oregon State University.
- Alinsky, S. (1969). Reveille for radicals. New York: Vintage Books.
- Baker, K., Hinze, S., & Manzi, N. (1991). Minnesota’s fiscal disparities program. St. Paul: Minnesota House of Representatives, Research Department.
- Baldassare, M. (1986). Trouble in paradise: The suburban transformation in America. New York: Columbia University Press.
- Beauregard, R. A. (1989). Atop the urban hierarchy. Lanham, MD: Rowman.
- Berry, J. M., Portney, K. E., & Thomson, K. (1993). The rebirth of urban democracy. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
- Bordieu, P. (1990). The logic of practice. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
- Chandler, J. A. (1996). Fun things to do with planners: Comprehensive statewide land use planning. Land Development (Fall), 17–20.
- City of Portland. (1972). Planning guidelines: Downtown Portland plan. Portland, OR: Author.
- City of Portland. (1988). Central city plan. Portland, OR: Author.
- City of Portland. (1995). Comprehensive plan goals and policies. Portland, OR: Author.
- Clark, T. N., & Goetz, E. G. (1994). The anti-growth machine: Can city governments control, limit or manage growth? In T. N. Clark (Ed.), Urban innovation: Creative strategies for turbulent times (pp 105–145). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
- Comprehensive land use planning coordination. Oregon, revised statutes. (1993). Chapter 197.
- Cox, K. R., & Mair, A. (1988). Locality and community in the politics of local economic development. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 78(2), 307–325.
- Daniels, T. L., & Nelson, A. C. (1986). Is Oregon’s farmland preservation program working? Journal of the American Planning Association, 52(1), 22–32.
- DeGrove, J. M., & Miness, D. (1992). The new frontier for land policy: Planning and growth management in the states. Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.
- DiGaetano, A., & Klemanski, J. (1993). Urban regime capacity: A comparison of Birmingham, England, and Detroit, Michigan. Journal of Urban Affairs, 15(4), 367–384.
- Downs, A. (1988). The real problem with suburban anti-growth policies. Breakings Review, 6(2), 23–29.
- Downs, A. (1994). New visions for metropolitan America. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
- Elkin, S. L. (1987a). City and regime in the American republic. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Elkin, S. L. (1987b). State and market in city politics: Or, the “real” Dallas. In C. N. Stone & H. T. Sanders (Eds.), The politics of urban development. (Chapter 2). Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
- Friedman, E. S. (1993). The facts of life in Portland, Oregon. Portland: Portland Possibilities, Inc.
- Gurr, T. R., & King, D. S. (1987). The state and the city. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Hales, C. A. (1991September 12). Higher density + certainty = affordable housing for Portland, Oregon. Urban Land, 12–15.
- Keating, M. (1991). Comparative urban politics: Power and the City in the United States, Canada, Britain, and France. Aldershot, Hants, England: Gower House; Brookfield, VT: E. Elgar.
- Knaap, G., & Nelson, A. C. (1992). The regulated landscape: Lessons on state land use planning from Oregon. Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.
- Knaap, G. (1987). Self-interest and voter support for Oregon’s land use controls. Journal of the American Planning Association, 53(1), 92–97.
- Knaap, G. (1994). Land use politics in Oregon. In C. Abbott, D. Howe, & S. Adler (Eds.), Planning the Oregon way: A twenty-year evaluation (pp 3–23). Corvallis: Oregon State University.
- Krumholz, N., & Clavel, P. (1994). Reinventing cities. Philadelphia: Temple University.
- Langdon, P. (1992, November). How Portland does it: A city that protects its thriving core. The Atlantic Monthly, 134–141.
- Lauria, M. (1994). Waterfront development, urban regeneration and local politics in New Orleans and Liverpool. Conference paper. Bristol, England: University of Bristol, School for Advanced Urban Studies.
- Lauria, M., (Ed.) (1997). Reconstructing urban regime theory: Regulating local government in a global economy. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
- Leo, C. (1994). The urban economy and the power of the local state. In F. Frisken (Ed.), The changing Canadian metropolis: A public policy perspective (vol. 2) (pp 657–698). Berkeley: University of California, Institute of Governmental Studies.
- Leo, C. (1995). Global change and local politics: Economic decline and the local regime in Edmonton. Journal of Urban Affairs, 17(3), 277–299.
- Leo, C. (1997). City politics in an era of globalization. In M. Lauria (Ed.), Reconstructing urban regime theory: Regulating urban politics in a global economy (pp 77–98). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
- Leo, C., Beavis, M., Carver, A., & Turner, R. (1998). Is urban sprawl back on the political agenda? Local growth control, regional growth management, and politics. Urban Affairs Review, 34(2).
- Leo, C. & Fenton, R. (1990). “Mediated enforcement” and the evolution of the state: Development corporations in Canadian city centres. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 14, 185–206.
- Leonard, H. J. (1983). Managing Oregon’s growth: The politics of development planning. Washington, DC: The Conservation Foundation.
- Lewis, P. G. (1996). Shaping suburbia: How political institutions organize urban development. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh.
- Little, C. E. (1974). The new Oregon trail. Washington, DC: The Conservation Foundation.
- Logan, J. R., & Zhou, M. (1989, June). Do suburban growth controls control growth? American Sociological Review, 54, 461–471.
- Looking Forward. (1996a). November/December. Tigard, OR: Oregonians in Action.
- Looking Forward. (1996b). September/October. Tigard, OR: Oregonians in Action.
- Lynn, M., & Matthews, K. (1991October 25). Super cities. Kiplinger’s Personal Finance Magazine, 42–43.
- Metro (1995SpringSummer). Frameword 2040. Portland, OR: Author.
- Molotch, H., & Vicari, S. (1988). Three ways to build: The development process in the United States, Japan and Italy. Urban Affairs Quarterly, 24(2), 188–210.
- Moshofsky, B. (1995). Oregon’s private property rights movement picks up steam. The Business Journal, 12(2), 39.
- Multnomah County. (nd).Citizen involvement handbook. Portland, OR: Author.
- Nelson, A. C., & Milgroom, J. H. (1995). Regional growth management and central-city vitality: Comparing development patterns in Atlanta, Georgia, and Portland, Oregon. In F. W. Wagner, T. E. Joder, & A. J. Mumphrey, Jr. (Eds.) Urban revitalization: Policies and programs (pp 1–37). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
- Northwest Pilot Project. (1994). Nineteen ninety-four downtown Portland affordable housing inventory. Portland, OR: Author.
- Oregon, administrative rules. (1991). Interpretation of Goal Two: Exception process. Chapter 660, Division 4, Land Conservation and Development Commission. March.
- Oregon, administrative rules. (1994). Agricultural land. Chapter 660, Division 33, Land Conservation and Development Commission. August.
- Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development. (1994). Oregon’s statewide planning goals. Salem: Author.
- Oregon Department of Transportation. (1995). Western Bypass study: Alternatives analysis. Portland: Author.
- Oregon Farm Bureau. (nd). The foundations of Oregon Farm Bureau land use policies. Typescript. Salem: Author.
- Oregon Forest Industries Council. (1995). OFIC policy statements: Land use planning goals. Salem: Author.
- Painter, J. (1997). Regulation, regime and practice in urban politics. In M. Lauria (Ed.), Reconstructing urban regime theory: Regulating urban politics in a global economy (pp 122–143). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
- Pease, J. R. (1994). Oregon rural land use: Policy and practices. In C. Abbott, D. Howe, & S. Adler (Eds.), Planning the Oregon way: A twenty-year evaluation. Corvallis: Oregon State University, 163–188.
- Pecorella, R. F. (1987). Fiscal crises and regime change: A contextual approach. In C. N. Stone & H. T. Sanders (Eds.), The politics of urban development (Chapter 3). Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
- Peirce, N. R., & Guskind, R. (1993). Breakthroughs: Re-creating the American city. New, Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University, Center for Urban Policy Research.
- Peterson, P. (1981). City limits. Chicago: University of Chicago.
- Portland Organizing Project. (1995January 31). Broken covenant/new covenant. Portland: Author.
- Portland Organizing Project. (1995March 28). Our Lenten message. Portland: Author.
- Portland Organizing Project. (nd).What Is the Portland Organizing Project? Portland: Author.
- Reitzes, D., & Reitzes, D. (1987). The Alinsky legacy: Alive and kicking. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
- Rosentraub, M. S., & Helmke, P. (1996). Location theory, a growth coalition, and a regime in the development of a medium-sized city. Urban Affairs Review, 31(4), 482–507.
- Shefter, M. (1985). Political crisis fiscal crisis. New York: Basic Books.
- Smith, P. J. (1996). Restructuring metropolitan governance: Vancouver and BC reforms. Policy Options, 17(7), 7–11.
- Stoker, G., & Mossberger, K. (1994). Urban regime theory in comparative perspective. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 12, 195–212.
- Stone, C. N. (1989). Regime politics: Governing Atlanta. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
- Stone, C. N. (1993). Urban regimes and the capacity to govern: A political economy approach. Journal of Urban Affairs, 15(1), 1–28.
- Stone, C. N. (1995). Political leadership in urban politics. In D. Judge, G. Stoker, & H. Wolman (Eds.), Theories of urban politics. (pp 96–116). London: Sage.
- Town planning: Where it works. (1990September 1). Economist, 316(7670) 24–25.
- Turner, R. S. (1990). New rules for the growth game: The use of rational state standards in land use policy. Journal of Urban Affairs, 12(1), 35–47.
- Update. Various, issues Salem: Oregon Small Woodlands Association.
- Walth, B. (1994). Fire at Eden’s gate: Tom McCall and the Oregon story. Portland: Oregon Historical Society Press.
- Whelan, R. K., Young, A. H., & Lauria, M. (1994). Urban regimes and racial politics in New Orleans. Journal of Urban Affairs, 16(1), 1–21.
- Whelan, R. K. (1987). New Orleans: Mayoral politics and economic-development policies in the postwar years 1945–86. In C. N. Stone & H. T. Sanders (Eds.), The politics of urban development (chapter 11). Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
- When city hall learns to think like a business. (1991October 25). Business Week, 136.