Corvallis’ city government could look very different come 2029. An appointed task force has put their finishing touches on a ballot measure proposal that would reshape the City Council in ways not seen since the charter was first adopted in 1948. The plan goes to the City Council next Monday; there’s a good chance they’ll put it on the ballot.
We believe the proposal needs further work.
If ultimately passed by Corvallis voters, we would have fewer city councilors, their terms would double to four years, and they would be term limited to three consecutive terms. All of that could be okay, but we think voters will need to see a map of the proposed ward boundaries before saying yes, and we suspect the idea of an even number of Councilors could be a dealbreaker as well.
So, let’s get into those two issues. At present, when the City Council votes, the mayor only votes in the event of a tie, which would not change under the current proposal to reduce from nine city councilors to six. Voters may perceive a likelihood of increased tie votes as increased mayoral power. And at present there may not be much stomach for that. By nature, a mayor is elected at-large.
And that at-large aspect emerged in a decisive way during the primary contest for Benton County Commissioner a couple months back. In that race, an insurgent candidate from an area of the county that had been feeling disenfranchised beat a previously undefeatable-looking incumbent. One could say it was the landfill that was decisive in that race, but it was not an accident that John Wilson’s campaign raised what part of the county he lives in and that social media zeitgeist followed.
Likewise, there is an expressed sense from parents that the school board’s members would make different decisions if each knew they were more directly accountable to a ward.
We do understand the Charter Review Task Force worry that with nine councilor seats to fill, too often, even an open seat generates interest from only one candidate. They also worry that with the current nine councilors, none gets sufficient time during deliberations. And we do understand the task force’s sense of uncertainty that reducing from nine councilors to seven may not be enough of a change.
Conversely, the task force was concerned that reducing from nine councilors to five would result in wards too large for councilors to ‘walk’ during campaigns – that councilors of limited means would have a tougher time running, and that larger wards could make it harder to serve constituents once elected.
Still, we think voters would be more likely support a change to seven wards, maybe a little less supportive of a change to five, and probably least supportive of six, given the perceived shift in mayoral power.
But even more than any of this, it seems basic that a voter would want to know what their ward would look like should they vote yes, should a prospective measure be passed. The current proposal doesn’t offer any of that.
There needs to be ward map and a written description of the boundaries.
Along with that, the process and factors that built that map, that will build future maps, should also be included. And the more precise that is the better. Which brings us to what could look like an aside, though we believe it’s central.
Today, there are voters in this town that see themselves as somewhat disenfranchised when it comes to decisions by local government. This has long been true in Southeast Corvallis and it’s becoming increasingly the case in Northeast Corvallis. We understand this view. Voters in the western reaches of this community have arguably had more influence, and they do appear to have greater resources.
We would recommend a new decisional metric for ward boundaries that takes economic justice into account. Maybe something like maximizing the number of wards where at least 51% of residents have incomes below 80% of the Area Median Income, or something like that.
In any event, we know it has been a long haul for the task force and other officials that have been working on these issues. We think they’re on the right track, but we also believe they have a few more miles to go. We would suggest a slow deliberative pace, maybe a little delayed, but a surer arrival, because ultimately, this will be up to Corvallis’ voters, and for them, the details will likely count.
To learn about our Editorial Board, click here
Do you have a story for The Advocate? Email editor@corvallisadvocate.com