Wednesday, Nov. 12, 12:00 noon
Board Room, Multnomah County Bldg., 501 SE Hawthorne Blvd., Portland
Guest Speakers:
Janice Thompson, Executive Director of Democracy Reform Oregon
Mary Hepokoski, LWV Portland Board Member
Parking: Ample street parking.
By Bus: TriMet bus lines from downtown: 4-Division to Gresham TC; 10-Harold to Foster Loop; 14-Hawthorne to 94th & Foster. Get off at SE Haw-thorne & 6th.
In the spring of 2007, the delegates at the League of Women of Oregon State Convention adopted an 18 month study of election methods. Janice Thompson, Executive Director of Democracy Reform Oregon, and Mary Hepokoski, both LWV of Portland members, co-chaired this study. Please join them Wednesday, November 12, 12:00 noon, Board Room, Multnomah County Building, 501 SE Hawthorne Boulevard, Port-land, to learn about alternative election methods proposed for Oregon.
The study covers a wide variety of topics and proposals including criteria for evaluating election systems; single seat and multiple seat election methods; instant run-off voting; fusion voting; election of a non partisan legislature; and the National Popular Vote. Come learn about these alternatives, ask questions and prepare yourselves for the discussion / consensus process in the November unit meetings.
"There are well-known trade-offs implicit in choosing one system over another, and all systems, including proportional ones, have to cut off representation somewhere. The argument over which system is best is a non-terminating disagreement. Still, a choice has to be made for the state to function." - Bruce Cain, 2001 Help the League of Women Voters of Oregon make a “choice” among a number of election proposals. Participate in the LWVOR state study!
Come to the general meeting, read the study report mailed to every member in September, and join in a unit meeting discussion.
(Part of the state study included a look at Open Primaries and ballot Measure 65 specifically. It may be helpful to read this section of the study before you complete your ballot this election.)
Bridges collapsing, vehicles falling in sinkholes, and a house sliding down a hill all may be symptoms of aging or poorly maintained infrastructure. Is our country’s quality of life and economic well being in jeopardy because of our crumbling infrastructure? Come hear a panel of area experts in energy, transportation, and water infrastructures discuss the issues and a vision for the future.
I feel like a salmon that has successfully navigated the dams and rapids on a rushing river and that is now cruising at sea taking up nourishment. With thanks to a wonderful team of League volunteers, we accomplished all our election season goals. First, we compiled, edited, printed, and distributed 42,000 copies of the Voters’ Guides (25,000 copies through the Portland Tribune). Kathleen Hersh led the team that prepared the content, and Barbara Stalions organized the production and distribution phases.
Second, we conducted extensive tutorials on the ballot measures. Starting in late September, Amy Hjerstedt matched a small, dedicated pool of ballot measure speakers to the long list of requests for ballot measure information. Our Ballot Measure forum on October 8th went very well. Speakers from 5 or 6 different organizations, including former Secretary of State Norma Paulus, addressed Measures 56 (simple majority/property taxes), 58 (bilingual education), and 65 (the primary election process). The presentations provided a human perspective on what can be very dry material. If you couldn’t attend that event, I hope some of you caught our special, extended, ballot measure program on the MetroEast cable channel. Margaret Noel, Carol Cushman and I taped briefings on all 12 state measures on October 9th – the first experience with a teleprompter for Carol and me.
Finally, the Candidates Forum on October 14th was another success. We had candidates for the single Portland City Council position, the County Sheriff, and the two County Commission seats, answer League questions and explain their reasons for running for office. I’m grateful to Debbie Aiona for a solid list of suggested questions. I am always proud of the quality of information that comes out of these League events.
We were able to videotape both forums and the special ballot measure program, thanks to fund-ing provided by the League of Women Voters of the US and American Express. Those funds also paid for print and web advertising in the Portland Tribune that publicized the Voters’ Guides. We are still collecting data on the suc-cess rate for the on-line offering. We hope to upgrade our on-line services so that voters in the future will have easier access to our information.
I can now check off Voters Service on my League resume, since I have now experienced every part of the process. But I could not have done it without the assistance of my team, especially Mary Hepokoski and Barbara Fredericks. Everyone contributed an awesome depth of expertise and commitment to overcoming obstacles. Thank you all.
As to that sea cruise – I’m looking forward to a nourishing diet of Election Methods information in November. Join me at the General Meeting and at Units to discuss what works and what doesn’t in our election processes.
2. Which four criteria are more important and which four are less important for electing representatives who support voters’ interests? Why?
a. encourage competitive elections
b. ensure majority (instead of plurality)
c. encourage minority representation
d. encourage gender representation
e. increase voter participation
f. offer range of voter choice
g. encourage geographical representation
h. encourage “sincere” voting
i. encourage “wasted” votes reduction
j. prevent political manipulation
k. easy to use and administer
l. fair and accurate representation of political views
3. Should Oregon explore other election methods? If so, using the above criteria, which of the currently proposed election changes should Oregon consider for state or local elections? Why?
a. instant runoff
b. fusion
c. open/top two primary
d. other methods
4. Should the Oregon Legislature be elected using a nonpartisan method?
5. Should the Oregon Legislature or local bodies be elected using a multiple seat method? Why?
6. a. Which jurisdiction (state, county, or local) should fund current elections?
b. Considering that all election changes may have additional costs, who should finance them? Explain.
Although non-members may attend as observers or visitors, only League members may participate in the consensus process. A local unit or League’s consensus on a national or state issue does not constitute a final LWV position and should not be publicized.
Another form of reaching agree-ment is by concurrence. During this process agreement or a vote on a pre-stated position is required. LWV of Portland will be using this process to reach agreement on a revised city planning position in the February unit meetings.
LWVOR: The LWVOR Election Law position includes the following statements pertinent to this study:
“The League of Women Voters of Oregon believes elections should be conducted in a manner which encourages voter participation and supports: ...
“2. A formula for cost-sharing between the state and the counties for the state portion of the primary and general elections;
“3. Evaluating the timing of the Oregon Primary... “The League of Women Voters of Oregon believes citizens are entitled to voting procedures which provide ease of ballot access and use...”
Political parties are private institutions whose formation and access to the ballot are set by state law. Like all groups they are not monoliths and variation is to be expected in the views of any one political party’s members and leaders. In addition, Oregon’s statewide political parties, Democrat, Republican, Constitution, Pacific Green, Libertarian, Working Families, and Independent, likely have different views on their purpose. These views will influence opinions on the advantages and disadvantages of our current plurality partisan elections compared with alternative election methods.
For example, the Working Families Party expresses more interest in using its party status to advance discussion of the issues it advocates than in running candidates. This is reflected in this party’s particular interest in fusion voting which doesn’t require running a candidate and provides an opportunity to demonstrate to an elected official from a major party the ability to deliver votes based on certain key issues.1
The Pacific Green Party’s website identifies instant runoff voting as its election reform priority. This party has more of a history of running candidates and, presumably, an interest in avoiding the spoiler effect and facilitating sincere voting by its supporters that would be facilitated by IRV.2
Maintenance of party status is also an issue for minor parties that could influence their views on alternative voting methods. Current election law ensures that minor parties have a spot on general election ballots if they nominate a candidate. This right is taken away in an open/top two primary, which could result in some minor party members and leaders opposing this reform. Minor party players may feel that being required to run their candidates along with all other candidates for a partisan office in the primary undermines their ability to maintain ballot access by decreasing the likelihood of participating in higher turnout general lections. Other minor party players may support the open/top two primary system because they believe it increases opportunities for one of their members to be one of the “top two” general election candidates.
Loss of guaranteed slots on general election ballots likely contributes to opposition to the open/top two primary reform by many supporters of the two major political parties. In general, the open/top two primary system most clearly shifts the purpose of elections away from meeting the interests of political parties to a means for voters to express their candidate preferences.
The Oregon open/top two primary proposal is more “party friendly” than Washington’s because declaration of party status during voter registration is retained and ballot listings of party endorsements is an option. Nevertheless, this reform option may accelerate current trends for increased nonaffiliated voter registrations because being a member of a major party is no longer a requirement to vote in partisan primaries.
To summarize, views on partisan election reforms will likely depend on whether or not the purpose of elections is perceived as a means for a voter to select his or her favorite candidate or the mechanism by which major parties elect nominees or an opportunity for a minor party to advance its views on its priority issues.
1. Oregon Working Families Party Fusion Resources, Revised June 21, 2008 from: www.oregonwfp.org/fusion.html
2. Pacific Green Party, Crisis of Democra-cy, Retrieved June 21, 2008 from: pacificgreenparty.org/issues/democracy
Portland Plan Update: A Report Back to the Community on the First Phase
Friday, November 7, 1:00 pm – 3:00 pm
Room 433, Board of Trade Building, 310 SW 4th Avenue, Portland
In addition to the Bureau of Planning staff update on the first phase of the Portland Plan, the committee will discuss the Comprehensive Plan Assessment and the Central Portland Plan Assessment. Both of these documents can be found on the Portland Plan website: www.portlandonline.com/portlandplan. The reports provide information on the planning process and describe current conditions and trends. All members welcome. Questions? Call Debbie Aiona.
At the League of Women Voters of the Columbia River Region 2008 Convention, members adopted an update of the Metropolitan Transportation position with a focus on Tri-Met. At its regular meetings the board and interested League members will be hearing from representatives of various agencies about Tri-Met operations, planning, routes, schedules, and safety.
At the October board meeting, Jamie Snook (Principal Planner) and Dana Lucero (Public Involvement Specialist) of Metro explained Metro’s role in the regional transit system. They spoke about the history and background of Metro, the future role of High Capacity Transit, and the Lake Oswego-Portland Transit Project.
Metro is the guiding force in regional planning. It brings together cities, counties, and rural areas along with business, government and community leaders to form the plans for transportation, growth concept, parks and natural areas, public places, and travel options. The 2040 Growth Concept is a 50-year vision for managing the region’s growth. Some of the goals of the 2035 Regional Transportation Plan are vibrant communities and efficient urban form, transportation choices, safety and security, environmental stewardship, fiscal stewardship, and accountability. Metro planning is a public process. It uses technical advisory groups, stakeholder workshops, public hearings, and websites to involve the planners. In the transportation arena, Metro is responsible for planning the system. Tri-Met implements and operates it.
High Capacity Transit systems are currently being implemented in the Metro area. MAX is a High Capacity Transit system as is the new connector (WES) between Wilsonville and Beaverton (opening in February 2009). Metro and Tri-Met are partnering with cities and counties and seeking public input for additional systems. A good high capacity corridor would have some of the following qualities: fill gaps in the existing transit system; complement and reinforce land use planning goals; ensure equity in distribution of the impacts and benefits. It would also be cost effective, energy efficient, and safe.
Metro is studying the Lake Oswego to Portland transit and trail alternatives. Their goal is to identify the best transit investment in the corridor. This is a public process and involves many partners: the Federal Transit Administration, Metro, Tri-Met, Lake Oswego, Portland, Clackamas County, Multnomah County, and ODOT. Since the start, there have been over 1,200 citizen contacts. The alternatives have been narrowed down to no-build, bus rapid transit, and streetcar. Environmental impact studies along with other analysis will be completed regarding each option.
More information can be found on the web at: www.oregonmetro.gov
November LWVCRR Meeting
Speaker TBA
Tuesday, November 4, 10:30 am
Room 433, Board of Trade Building, 310 SW 4th Avenue, Portland
The early morning drive on I-5 to the fall workshop in Eugene for President Betsy Pratt and me did have periods of fog, but eventually the weather cleared to be a beautiful fall Saturday. I thought the most unusual presentation that day was “New Strides in Voting Accessibility” by Gene Newton, Secretary of State HAVA Program Officer and his wife, Angel Hale. Oregon’s vote by mail elections required developing special technology to allow vision impaired and other special needs voters to vote in the privacy of their own homes as others do. Ms. Hale demonstrated how she as a vision impaired voter uses technology to vote. Her computer software reads an electronic ballot to her as she uses just two keys, the up and down arrows, to navigate the ballot. She can adjust the speed of the voice. It was amazing the rate at which she was able to listen to the reader.
Election officials can email electronic ballots to voters who can print it before or after completing it depending on their needs. The voters also print the envelopes. They enclose a completed ballot, sign the envelope and mail it in. This can reduce the time needed to provide an overseas absentee ballot especially for military personnel.
Mr. Newton said that a software company has provided a great deal of free work in helping Oregon election officials develop their technology to assist voters. The company expects to be able to market it to other states.
Chinook Books, Enter-tainment Books, Umbrellas
All of these items are for sale by our League as fundraisers to benefit our regular fund. Please consider purchasing them at our general meetings, unit meetings, or by contacting the office or the League member listed below. All would make wonderful holiday gifts. Umbrellas are $15, and Chinook Books and Entertainment Books are each $20. Contact Carol Cushman for umbrellas, Carolyn Rundorff for Entertainment Books, and Pat Osborn for Chinook Books.
Fall Direct Mail
Each fall our League sends out a very large mailing asking for financial support for the LWV of Portland Education Fund. Through a fundraising agreement with the state League, we have use of the Portland names on their mailing list once a year. Past non-member donors to the League (219) received a Voters’ Guide, return envelope and donation coupon with their letter, and non-members who had not donated in the past (numbering 1399) received just a letter, return envelope and donation coupon.
This mailing is a very large project and involves many volunteers. Those who helped by reviewing the mailing list included Corinne Paulson, Leeanne MacColl, Debbie Kaye, Carol Cushman and Pat Osborn. Those who helped with the four days of mail assembly were Debbie Kaye, Carol Cushman, Pat Russell, George Bingham, Judith Litt, Mary Cammann, Darleane Lemley, Flo Wheeler, Beth Johnson, Claire Corwin-Kordosky, Leeanne MacColl, Jeanne Steed, Mary McWilliams, Rita Fawcett, Alan Osborn and Pat Osborn. And, of course, Heather Drake, our office manager, did a superb job of organizing everything.
Fundraising Request from the LWV of Oregon
All of our members received a fundraising request from the LWV of Oregon in early fall. (This is why we did not include our members in our fall direct mail.) If you donated in response, thank you! Your donation will be matched one to one through a matching grant made through the generosity of several League mem-bers (many of whom are from our Portland League). If you have not responded, please consider a donation at this time if you are able. Your donation will credit our Portland League for our share of our bill for state-wide Voter Service (the greatest cost within this is printing of the Voters’ Guides).
Corporate Contributors
The following local businesses and organizations contributed funds toward our Voter Service Program this year: Rose E. Tucker Charitable Trust, Cogan Owens Cogan, Vernier Software and Technology, The Standard (Insurance), Pamplin Media Group, Multnomah Bar Association, Sara Frewing Education Fund, Neil Kelly, New Seasons Market, Ater Wynne LLP, and Paloma Clothing.
Do you have suggestions of busi-nesses that might provide financial support to our League? You can help us greatly by sharing your ideas with the development committee so that we can include them in our corporate fundraising campaign.
Development Committee
Thanks goes to the development committee for their work in coordi-nating fundraising work: Margaret Noel, Jan Wolf, Carol Cushman, Kris Hudson, Mary McWilliams, Debbie Kaye, Dick Wilson and Pat Osborn, Chair.
LWV Portland volunteers played an active role in providing voter registration opportunities for Portland/Multnomah County residents in October as well as distributing LWV Voters’ Guides to hundreds of interested voters.
My personal thanks to all of the League volunteers who gave of their time.
In my own experience as a volunteer with voter registration, I received countless statements of gratitude for the excellent nonpartisan lens that the League provides for voters who are hungry for an unbiased, thorough presentation of the issues and candidates. Clearly, the Portland League and the League in general are highly respected for this important work.
It was my privilege to serve as the Coordinator of Voter Registration this Fall.