Vote No on 26-89
Review of Portland’s City Charter is a good idea. The proposal on the ballot in May, Measure 26-89, is not.
Top Three Reasons to Vote No on 26-89, ongoing Charter Review:
1. Fifteen citizens who have not been elected by a vote of the people, should not have the power to refer Charter (Constitutional) changes to the ballot without approval by elected officials.
We have an initiative process, and we have an elected City Council with authority to refer Charter changes to the ballot. Fifteen hand-picked citizens, no matter how hardworking, worthy, and diligent, should not have the power to force Portlanders to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars and many hours debating ballot measures without the consent of elected officials.
2. The proposed language allows future Charter Commissions to refer changes to the voters at any primary or general election. To ensure meaningful participation, Charter change ballot measures should be allowed only at the General Election of even years.
The current process shows the folly of allowing hugely significant Charter changes to be decided in odd-year primary elections. Voters aren’t engaged, and the campaign has turned out to be a series of expensive PR soundbites rather than real review of the issues. Last year, even with contested State Legislature races, turnout in Portland’s primary election was less than 36%; this May, the turnout may be even lower. I believe changing Portland’s Constitution is more important than raising property taxes, and should be subject to at least equivalent process rules.
3. The ballot measure does not reference gender in selecting the Charter Commission’s membership, and there is no mechanism proposed to ensure that allowing each of five Councilors to select four members will result in balanced demographics on the Commission.
The ballot measure proposes language that allows all 20 members to be men, at a time when all nominees would be chosen by the five men on the City Council. Although the proposed language calls for the Commission to reflect some aspects of the city’s diversity, each Council member picks four, with no process defined to ensure balanced representation. At the Mercury debate last week, all six speakers on 26-91 were men; at the League of Women Voters’ forum this Tuesday, six of the seven speakers are men. Mayor Potter appointed 15 men, 10 women to the current Commission. The evidence suggests that absent specific language requiring balanced representation (in a wide variety of factors) on the Commission empowered to refer future Charter changes, it’s unlikely to happen by magic.
I’ve been on City of Portland committees appointed by Council that took huge amounts of time, so I’m grateful to Charter Review Commission members for their service. In each of seven years on the Planning Commission, over a couple on the Task Force on Neighborhood Involvement, and in three years on the Land Division code rewrite, I donated way more than 100 hours myself. And was mighty ticked when the Council disregarded the Planning Commission’s recommendations, put the Task Force’s report on a shelf, and ruled in favor of the developers in many contested sections of the subdivision code. I understand the Charter Review Commission’s desire to get their recommendations on the ballot as soon as possible, and to allow future changes to be referred even without Council approval. But….
I know what it takes to be a diligent, thoughtful, appointed Commission member. And I know it’s not on the same plane as what’s needed to become an elected official. I ran for City Council. For nine months, I worked 17 hour days, barely sleeping in between, to qualify for Public Campaign Financing and try to persuade 30,000 people to vote for me. I fell about 5,000 votes short. One thing I learned, was that winning election to office is a whole lot harder than volunteering time on an appointed committee. Elected officials are accountable to every citizen in Portland. Appointed Commission members answer only to their own conscience and the people they hear from in testimony. They are shielded from feedback from citizens disgruntled with their actions. The worst that can happen is that they are asked to resign their unpaid position.
Yes, we want thorough review of the old Charter, including amendment of items assessed by the current Commission and left in the proposals on the ballot, such as punishing paupers. We don’t need a Charter amendment to require review; we need Mayors and City Council members who fund a Commission in each year’s budget, and appoint members in an ongoing public process respecting and including diversity of all kinds. We need gender-balanced Commissions, and a mechanism to ensure diverse racial, ethnic, age, and geographic representation. And we need elected officials willing to take responsibility for referring Charter changes to voters, rather than giving 15 appointed volunteers that right.
Please vote No on 26-89.