Stan Long charter proposals may get committee review

The Lane County Charter Review Committee may be asked to look at two proposals from Stan Long. And after praising ‘people, not politicians’ June 26, the League of Women Voters clarifies its position. With commissioners July 9:

Charlcie Kaylor (League of Women Voters of Lane County): I’m Charlcie Kaylor, vice president of the League of Women Voters of Lane County… Let me explain the league and its mission, which informs how we make decisions about what we advocate for.

[00:00:24] The league is nonpartisan and does not support or oppose any political party or any candidate. The league promotes political responsibility through informed and active participation in government and acts on member selected and researched, researched, researched governmental issues. I’m talking research on a massive level, starting locally and working through the hierarchy of state and national levels, coming to a consensus on the position.

[00:00:53] League of Women Voters of the United States position on redistricting, briefly stated, supports redistricting processes and enforceable standards that promote fair and effective representation at all levels of government, with maximum opportunity for public participation.

[00:01:11] The proposed charter change brought to you from Mssrs. Long and Gary falls short of those standards. Our comments are detailed in the written testimony for this hearing and were already submitted. Thank you for considering the league’s position. We urge you to forward the voters of the recommendations of your Charter Review Committee.

[00:01:31] John Q: Commissioners also heard from William Gary, representing Stan Long.

[00:01:35] William Gary (Harrang Long): I’m William Gary. I’m an attorney at Harrang Long. I represent Stanton F. Long. I came here this morning expecting to receive feedback, but not of this type (laughter).

[00:01:49] I’d like to make three brief points. First, contrary to what some others have suggested, the proposal by Mr. Long to create an independent 15-member redistricting commission is not some sinister plot by a special interest group to take over the county. Mr. Long made the proposal because in his view, the proposals put forth by the Charter Review Commission do not go far enough to ensure that redistricting is a neutral, apolitical process that is neither controlled nor influenced by those who have a personal stake in redistricting.

[00:02:35] The proposal is not Mr. Long’s. It is substantively identical to Initiative Petition 14, a statewide legislative redistricting proposal that was put forward by a coalition of organizations called People Not Politicians that includes among others Common Cause, the League of Women Voters, the NAACP and OSPIRG. It did not originate in some conservative think tank.

[00:03:11] Second, although I do not know what legal concerns have been raised by County Council in secret advice to the Commission, I do know that Initiative Petition 14 was upheld against a pre-election challenge by the Oregon Court of Appeals in a case called Mason v. Griffin-Valade. And since Mr. Long’s proposal closely mirrors Initiative Petition 14, it is a safe bet that this measure would survive any pre election challenge as well. I also know that any post election challenge to the substance of the measure is also unlikely to succeed because Article VI Section 10 of the Oregon Constitution expressly gives the voters of Lane County broad home rule authority to devise a county government structure of their choosing. That home rule authority undoubtedly includes the authority to decide how districts will be drawn and by whom.

[00:04:17] And finally, I want to emphasize what we’re asking the commission to do and what we’re not asking you to do. We are not asking you to enact this into law. We are not asking you to decide that this is the best proposal. We are simply asking you to let the voters decide. That is what direct democracy is all about. Please vote to put this measure on the ballot.

[00:04:44] John Q: One member of the Charter Review Committee protested.

[00:04:49] Morgan Munro (Lane County Charter Review Committee): This is Morgan Munro. The Gary Long proposal is clearly not ready for the ballot. At the last public hearing on this, Mr. Gary himself asked to be able to review and edit his own proposal. And review is certainly needed, but don’t do it in a backroom deal. Convene a task force or a committee to review, revisit our Lane County redistricting process and parameters. Hold public meetings. Gather public input. Hear from your own staff and subject matter experts.

[00:05:19] Be transparent. The Gary Long proposal may have begun life as the ‘People Not Politicians’ effort of Petition Initiative 14, but important, very intentional changes have been made that corrupt both the independence and the efficacy of that effort. Mr. Gary claims it’s identical, but it isn’t. There’s a reason that major concerns are being raised on this proposal.

[00:05:46] It is far from identical to Petition Initiative 14. Does Mr. Gary hope that no one will read the proposal he submitted? That no one will notice the important changes that have been snuck into it? Why are they so committed to avoiding public review of these ideas? Well, perhaps, it’s because under the Gary Long proposal, one of the changes is that every single redistricting committee member would be handpicked by sitting commissioners.

[00:06:16] Every. Single. Member. Additionally, key principles of democracy, such as equal representation under the law, that voters should choose our elected officials and not the other way around, and that it’s the people who vote, not the land, are all seriously undermined and intentionally sabotaged by the combined impact of the redistricting proposal and the proposed district definitions.

[00:06:43] Don’t put your thumb on the scale of our democracy. Please let the sun shine on any idea before you move it to the ballot. Convene a task force or a committee and robustly review any proposals related to redistricting and commissioner district definitions. Operate in full transparency. Why rush this serious and important issue?

[00:07:08] Good process matters. Transparency matters. Using county resources responsibly matters. Don’t place ideas on the ballot on a whim. If community members want to bring an idea forward and can gather the needed signatures, they’re always welcome to do so. As commissioners, we need you to be judicious, transparent, and thoughtful with our county, our charter, and our democracy.

[00:07:33] John Q: Commissioner Pat Farr joined Ryan Ceniga and David Loveall in seeking to release a memo about the Stan Long proposal from county counsel. But to share it with the public, commissioners would have to waive attorney-client privilege.

[00:07:47] Commissioner Laurie Trieger: We wanted to understand a bit more the ramifications, the opportunity, the precedent, and the potential complexities or unintended consequences in waiving attorney-client privilege and what that really means and we have a memo prepared for us by our interim county counsel services and an executive session set up as a training for us to better understand. So that may be forthcoming.

[00:08:09] What my question in follow-on to county council would be, rather than necessarily waiving that at this time until we have more information, if what’s wanted is to understand the relative merits and differences between the committee’s recommendation and the recommendation that came to us through Mr. Gary on behalf of Stan Long, then the Charter Review Committee could be asked to do a side-by-side to analyze, review, discuss with staff support from the Office of Legal Counsel, the clerk if need be. Those meetings would then include opportunity for public comment, they would be public meetings.

[00:08:50] So if the idea is: We want an analysis of that to go through the process, because the memo was agreed to as a step in determining whether adding that proposal to our agenda in the form of a board order was even an option.

[00:09:05] John Q: Lane County commissioners may reconvene the Charter Review Committee and ask those volunteers to work with county staff to evaluate the Stan Long proposals. You can offer public comment Tuesday morning July 16 at 9 a.m. Commissioners will discuss the issue Tuesday afternoon around 1:30 p.m.