Last month, Councilors Ava Olson and Alison Bowden sought to get the ball rolling on an ordinance ensuring protections for poly Corvallisites. The Council seemed willing, or at least willing-ish to think about it.
At the time, they voted to allow Olson and Bowden to speak with the City Attorney – which would’ve been the next step toward building a draft ordinance. But that was then. Fast forward to last week’s City Council meeting, and presto-chang-o, the proposal looks pretty much dead.
Councilor Jan Napack moved to table the matter. Mayor Charles Maughan advised Council a motion to table would mean there’s no need for discussion. Only Bowden voted against tabling the matter, Olson was absent from the evening meeting.
During the councilor’s comments portion of the meeting, Bowden said nothing on the matter. We asked Bowden and Olson if they would like to comment, and at press time neither had responded.
What was on the table: Last month, Bowden and Olson said they were seeking an ordinance ensuring protections in housing, employment, and public accommodations for poly folks. They said they had worked with the Polyamory Legal Advocacy Coalition to better understand the lived experiences impacting individuals and families in our community, and how to best protect their rights.
In a memo to the Council at the time, Bowden wrote, “Councilor Olson and I seek your consensus to formally consider an ordinance prohibiting discrimination based on family or relationship structure—a policy that would protect diverse households, including multi-partner families, multi-generational homes, consensually non-monogamous relationships, and asexual/aromantic individuals. Before directing staff or the city attorney to review the draft, we want to confirm council’s interest in advancing this discussion.”
City Attorney review: When the Council gave the okey-doke for Bowden and Olson to take their proposal to the City’s attorney for a review, it fell to City Manager Mark Shepard to facilitate and report back to the Council.
”The City Council directed staff to send the matter on for a ‘high level’ legal review indicating a desire to limit the time and expense for this work,” wrote Shepard in a memo to the City Council for last week’s council meeting. “The City Attorney conducted a review and provided the City Council with a summary privileged and confidential legal analysis. The City Attorney recommends that if the Council wants to consider continuing this effort, that it discusses the matter in an executive session as a next step. The City Attorney estimates about another 4 hours for attorney legal review and editing and then additional hours associated with supporting an executive session, Council questions, and document revisions.”
Shepard also said the City had already spent about $4,950 in attorney fees on the matter.
Poly protections and legal fees: The City contracts with a private law firm for City Attorney services. Last year they changed firms. When the City did that, they also switched from paying a flat annual retainer fee to an hourly fee for services plan, which is more expensive overall. Because of that, City Councilors do not have the same access to the City’s attorney that they once had – they need Council approval to speak with the City Attorney. Cost can now be used as a cudgel to curb prospective proposals like a poly rights ordinance.
Wider analysis: The summary tabling of an evolved poly rights policy in a town like Corvallis is surprising. So is the assertion that the legal analysis of a proposed public policy would be privileged and confidential, and maybe even require a closed executive session for consideration. It’s an analysis paid for with public funds, and it’s not like this is a contract negotiation or personnel matter.
There’s a whole hush-hush vibe that has somehow overtaken this matter, and we just don’t get it. But then, maybe we don’t need to. And if you’re in a poly relationship or an ally, maybe you don’t need to get it either.
Voters can put an initiative on the City ballot. It’s the kind of agency that’s a last resort, it is hard work. But if this council continues in its current trajectory, they’re going to spend most of their time on internal issues, building projects and looking for ways to tax so they can build those projects. Some will think that’s fine, others not, but we don’t need to make a value judgment to see that’s the current course.
If a group of Corvallis folks does choose to pursue a citizen initiative supporting poly folks, we beg, please get real nerd help writing the thing. Talk to lawyers that know how to write law. Talk to fiscal policy wonks that can help write policy. Work with someone that understands election law. In our experience watching elections, all of that makes yes votes far easier to get, and legal challenges way less likely. Boring – we know. But then you get to campaign, which makes us kind of jealous, because journalist-folk don’t get to campaign, and it looks really-really fun.
By Hallie Greenberg and Steven J. Schultz
Do you have a story for The Advocate? Email editor@corvallisadvocate.com