Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Northwest labor press. (Portland , Ore.) 1987-current | View Entire Issue (April 20, 2007)
May ballot will recommend changes to Portland’s charter Measure 26-91 seeks to change the Next week, Oregonians will begin current “commission form of city gov- receiving ballots for the May 15 spe- cial election. On that ballot in Portland ernment” and replace it with a “strong mayor” form of government. will be four measures that could dra- Most of the arguments against matically change how government op- Measure 26-91 are similar: It gives the erates in the City of Roses. mayor too much power. If you recall, in November 2005 “The Char- Portland Mayor ter Review Tom Potter assem- bled a citizen Char- Labor unions and councils Committee ter Review Com- are supporting only one of agreed that we have a great mission to review city,” Chris the City Charter (ba- the four proposals — Smith, co- sically the city’s Measure 26-92, dealing chair of the constitution). After with PDC. Committee for more than a year of Accountable meetings the Com- City Government, said at an April 10 mission came up with four recom- mended changes to the city charter, all debate hosted by the League of Women Voters. “Is it great because of, of which will appear on the ballot, in or in spite of, its commission form of four separate measures. goverment? The charter changes include: Mea- Smith said opponents of the meas- sure 26-89 – implementation of peri- ure firmly believe that the commission odic charter review; Measure 26-90 – Portland’s Civil Service system; Mea- form of government has contributed to Portland’s prosperity, livability and sure 26-91– Portland’s form of city government; and Measure 26-92 – the active culture of citizen engagement. Proponents of Measure 26-91 say Portland Development Commission the commission form of government and its relationship to the City. is “outdated bureacracy” that is cost- Portland area labor unions and la- ing the city $10 million to $15 million bor councils are supporting only one each year. The proposed new system of the four proposals — Measure 26- 92, which, specifically, would increase “breaks down the walls of city bu- reaus, it does away with duplication oversight of the Portland Develop- and puts it in the hands of professional ment Commission by requiring PDC managers,” said Bob Ball, a member to adhere to the City Council’s vision, of the Charter Review Commission. goals, budget process and perform- Smith said the Charter Review rec- ance measures. PDC is the economic ommendation isn’t about saving development arm of the City. PDC’s commissioners are appointed by the mayor and confirmed by the City Council. City Commissioner Randy Leonard said PDC is the only agency in the state — with a taxpayer fi- nanced budget of nearly $250 million a year — “with absolutely no over- sight by an elected official. It’s wrong. And it has to change,” he said. Labor is actively opposing the other three charter change measures. Measure 26-89 would require the city to review its charter at least every 10 years. A 20-member commission would be formed to review the charter, with super-majority authority (15 or more votes) to forward changes to the ballot box without City Council ap- proval. Measure 26-90 would change Civil Service language by increasing the number of classifications that could serve as “at will” employees. APRIL 20. 2007 money, “it’s about who controls the power in the city.” Under the proposal, the mayor would make all appoint- ments and still maintain a vote on the five-person City Council. “If you think developers hold sway in City Hall now, wait and see what happens under the strong mayor style,” he said. Proponents of Measure 26-90, the change in Civil Service language, also cite “efficiencies” as a major reason for the change. The Charter Review Committee’s proposal whittles down eight pages of Civil Service language currently in the City Charter to just two pages. It does so by eliminating what it says are outdated, conflicting and confusing language. Labor unions say the measure will increase the number of “at-will” em- ployees at the city and eliminate all language referring to how many tem- porary employees the city can hire. Under the current charter, the city is restricted to using temp workers no more than 860 hours a year. Rob Wheaton, a business representative of Laborers Municipal Employees Local 483, said at the League of Women Voters debate that the city already cir- cumvents the rules by laying off temp workers for a certain amount of time before rehiring them ... as temps. Without the specific language in the charter, he said there is no telling how many more temp workers the city would hire. Labor’s argument against Measure 26-89 is that a commission that has NORTHWEST LABOR PRESS not been elected by a vote of the peo- ple should not have the power to refer Charter changes to the ballot (in either a primary or general election) without approval by elected officials. And though the four ballot meas- ures are a package deal from the Char- ter Review Commission, they can win voter approval separately. For in- stance, if Measure 26-91 is approved and city government is converted to a strong mayor, but Measure 26-89 — which requires periodic review of the charter — fails, Portland could be stuck with a strong mayor format for decades. Vice versa, if the strong mayor proposal fails and the periodic charter review measure passes, the form of city government issue could resurface. Many political pundits believe vot- ers will reject all the measures simply because they don’t understand them. That could be a problem for the labor unions supporting Measure 26-92, the PDC oversight measure. Please call 1-800-678-9072 PAGE 3
