Split Bend Council Won’t Put Mayor to Vote

A split Bend City Council voted 4-3 Wednesday night to go along with a citizen committee?s recommendations and not send voters a city charter amendment that would have the mayor elected directly, instead of being chosen among councilors for the post.

Councilors also agreed to proceed with a $5.6 million hydroelectric project on the major new city surface water project. Councilor Mark Capell noted that with revenue from power generation, it will make the spendy project ?cash-flow positive from the first year.?

But first, some pomp and circumstance, as new Police Chief Jeff Sale was sworn in at the Bend Municipal Court, with councilors and a bagpipe brigade on hand.

Sale said that like most newcomers in such positions, he will do plenty of learning and listening to start. But in his research about Bend, he said he saw the potential for the police force ?to go to another step to be better than what it is today.?

While the mayor leads council meetings, he or she has no extra powers in the current system (the so-called ?weak mayor? option), other than ceremonial and on some statewide organiztions. But the idea of joining most Oregon cities with a directly elected mayor prompted councilors to form the citizen panel — and after weighing the pros and cons, it unanimously came out against the notion of making the switch.

Councilor Jodie Barram offered some points not the pros-cons list, such as the perception among some that the mayor is picked in a ?back room deal? and that the jockeying for that post — which along with wielding the meeting gavel includes more public appearances and roles on statewide groups — can distract councilors during the latter part of every other year.

Currently, mayors are appointed for 2-year terms, and it seems a majority of councilors are in support for moving that to a 4-year term, for continuity. She also noted that many people, in and out of the city, already mistakenly believe the mayor is elected to that post, rather than just one of seven councilors.

But former mayor Kathie Eckman said she didn?t see enough of a need to make the change, and Capell agreed, as did self-professed ?rookie? Councilor Scott Ramsay, who said he feels the current ?system brings balance to the council.?

Colleague Tom Greene said he didn?t think the timing was good, but acknowledged that at some point, as the city grows, the move might make sence.

When Mayor Jeff Eager?s time to speak came — last, as is customary — he joked about how the die already was cast, with four foes of proposing the change to voters.

?Talk about a ?weak mayor? — my vote doesn?t count!? he said to laughter.

But Eager gave his views anyway, saying he agreed with colleague and elected-mayor proponent Jim Clinton on the philosophical view: ?It should be a right of the people to elect their mayor.? He called it a relatively small step, since it would not increase the mayor?s powers.

?People think I speak for the city,? Eager said.

Clinton said it?s ?almost un-American? to have councilors, rather than the people choose the mayor — or to at least not let the people make the decision on whether or not to have an elected mayor.

Greene said it didn?t appear to be a big issue among citizens, as he?d received only a handful of comments, ?split 50-50.?

There also was a bit of discussion about whether to go back to the committee for a look at whether the mayor should have a bigger role — and whether the charter, last changed nearly a decade ago, could use any other changes. But in the end, councilors agreed that it should be a council sub-committee that looks over the charter for any such possible improvements.

Clinton, a critic of the city?s spendy surface water improvement project, was the only no vote on a 6-1 decision to proceed with a hydroelectric generation facility as part of the $62 million project (adding less than 10 percent additional cost). It’s expected to provide enough power for 1,000 homes, and revenue to offset any added rise in water bills.

Barram said the figures prevented to the council ?say it?s better not to wait? under any water flow scenario (or likely power revenue) to build the hydro facility at the same time the new water treatment plant and pipeline are built. But Clinton said while hydropower makes sense, the costs are still too fuzzy for him to get on board.