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is “outdated bureacracy” that is cost-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