Dear Editor,
As a community, most of us believe in liberty as afforded to us by the Constitution of the USA. We live by the rule of law, in sovereignty and self-determination to make wise choices. We desire to live in unity with others, loyalty and transparency in personal relationships. Honesty in our interactions and exchanges, integrity of those in leadership, and contentment in our lot in life, all help us build a healthy community.
As a citizen, I feel it is important to take a step forward to invest in our local community of Sweet Home. Therefore, I attend city council meetings when I can. I am also pleased that our Mayor Coleman is open to meet with the public every Thursday at 3:00pm at Into the Brew to openly discuss with others our concerns about our town.
Thursday afternoon, I discussed with the Mayor that at our last city council meeting there appeared to be a forced rush to change the Charter on the ballot to this May. Mayor Coleman mentioned that our small town Charter has a “weak mayor system.” We are a small town with small-town values, rather than a salaried “Mayor-Council” system in large cities. This means that her general responsibility is to officiate over the city council meetings and be involved in our community. Although she is well versed in the issues that the city council makes, she is also incredibly available at many events in town. I truly appreciate Mayor Coleman’s transparency and dedicated service to our community.
Nevertheless, there was a disturbance that occurred at the last city council meeting concerning a change in the charter to this May. The Mayor explained some concerns she had about this over reach, which I would like to number here:
- There is a concern about the financial impact of a change in the Charter on the ballot this year would have on tax payers. If this change in the Charter goes on the ballot this year, our city will have to pay for the change. Next year Linn County, which alternates with the city in spending this money would pay for changes in printing the ballot.
2. The last time these changes to the ballot occurred was in 2015. It cost the City $10,000. We estimated it now would be around a $30,000 cost to our city. Therefore, why is this issue being rushed through the city council, this year?
- There was a surprise in the timing to get the language pushed through to have this motion appear suddenly before all the city council meeting on Tuesday.
- It focuses staff attention on potential changes to the Charter which means their time is taken away from other matters.
- If this language passed, someone could potentially purchase the seat. A recall of an elected official can happen at any time. This language will not change that. Although, recalls rarely work.
Elisabeth Curtis
Sweet Home