Change (In the Home Rule Charter)

Progressives on the Lane County Commission say conservatives are gerrymandering districts

The Lane County Board of Commissioners approved a last-minute proposal from a private law firm to change the county charter, rejecting the work of its own committee — without including a future public hearing dedicated to the new amendments.  

On July 16, conservative commissioners Pat Farr, David Loveall and Ryan Ceniga voted for suggestions from private law firm Harrang Long to redraw a district map and establish a new redistricting committee. Commissioner Chair Laurie Trieger and Commissioner Heather Buch voted against.

No public hearing is scheduled on the Harrang Long amendments. The board will discuss the potential changes at its meeting August 6. Commissioners will then decide what heads to the Nov. 5 ballot.

The move upset members of the county’s Charter Review Committee, which has been working on the issue since November 2022. “I don’t like having my time wasted and hard work in good faith tossed out,” says Stefan Ostrach, CRC vice chair. “But the commissioners have the power to do that.” 

The Home Rule Charter governs how Lane County can and can’t operate. Changing, adding or removing anything in the charter statutorily requires a public vote.

Two motions the board approved were submitted on May 24 by William F. Gary, an attorney from Harrang Long representing his firm’s former partner, Stan Long. 

Trieger says the motions have yet to be vetted by the CRC or county counsel. 

“Clearly, the current board majority wants Stan Long’s proposal to go in front of the voters, regardless of the charter review committee’s recommendations,” Treiger says. “There is no legitimate reason, but a very clear purpose, on part of the current board majority.”

She adds, “This is unnecessary and wholly politically motivated.”

During the meeting, Buch requested Loveall amend his motion to include a public hearing since the new changes would be completely different from the CRC recommendations. “The only right thing to do would be to add a public hearing,” she said.

Loveall said his intentions were to “keep this momentum rolling” during the meeting. “I just want to get it done. I don’t want to kick it down the road.” 

Earlier in the meeting Loveall said, “I think in light of what we’ve been hearing in public testimony, that democracy is about the people. It’s by the people, it’s of the people, by the people and for the people.”

Critics have pointed out Harrang Long’s proposed redistricting would make it harder for a progressive commissioner to be elected in North Eugene — Farr’s district.

One of the Harrang Long proposals suggested rebuilding the Independent Redistricting Committee as the Citizens Redistricting Committee, making selection random from a vetted pool of 50 applicants. As it currently stands, county commissioners select the first five, who then select the next 10. 

According to Harrang Long’s proposal, anyone who currently holds or is a candidate for a position in government is ineligible, as are their family members, relatives and roommates. It also stipulates that committee members had been registered to vote in Lane County for at least three years and had voted in the last two of three general elections — excluding young people and those new to being politically active. 

The second motion — which Gary referred to as “housekeeping” in his letter — would redraw the current county districts five years before new census data.

According to Harrang Long’s proposal, if you live in the Whiteaker neighborhood you will now be considered a part of the South Eugene county district — rather than North Eugene — because Roosevelt Boulevard is the proposed boundary between the two.

“The proposal comes across as good government, but that Roosevelt Boulevard piece puts the lie to that,” Ostrach says. 

Ostrach says putting the line at Roosevelt Boulevard will cut across city wards, school districts and neighborhoods. “It’s clearly gerrymandering. Why Roosevelt Boulevard? I mean, it’s completely arbitrary,” Ostrach says. 

According to Trieger, the CRC recommended not redistricting until the next round of census data. “The effective impact of the Stan Long proposal does redistrict because it names specific geographic descriptions that effectively change the districts,” she says. “It is a very underhanded way of redistricting outside of a good process and not in the normal decennial calendar.”

After voting to refer the private law firm’s recommendations to the ballot, county commissioners voted down the suggested amendments from the CRC — with a two to three vote, commissioners Farr, Ceniga and Loveall dissenting.

One of the CRC’s amendments would have changed county districts names to only be numbers. For example, District 3 North Eugene would have just become District 3. Another would have extended the time frame the CRC can do its work to two years. 

Its final recommended amendment would have codified the Independent Redistricting Committee within the county charter — which now staying in county code can be modified whenever the commissioners want without requiring a public vote.

“I mean three commissioners are going to vote against putting them on the ballot,” Ostrach says. “I guess they’re dead in the water.”

Alongside the private law firm’s suggestions, the board unanimously voted for three repeals of current charter language suggested by the CRC to move to a discussion on August 6.

One will repeal a redundant spending limitation on the county, another will remove a section regarding East Alton Baker Park, which the county no longer owns, and the final will get rid of an income tax cap, which the county doesn’t collect.

The two amendments and three repeals will be discussed by the county commissioners at a public hearing on August 6. If passed, each one will make its way to the Nov. 5 ballot.

Lane County Board of County Commissioners will meet August 6 to discuss what the board will refer to the Nov. 5 ballot. To watch online or register for public comment go to LaneCounty.org.