City Council inclusion a one-time deal

Editorial

Portland voters didn’t understand the complexities of the charter reform measure on the 2022 ballot, but having no confidence in the city’s course, 57% of them approved it.

The big promise was of inclusion—those historically left out could get a seat at the table. In that regard, it has succeeded. A majority of our 12 present councilors may never have considered running in the old system.

The new charter—coupled with Portland’s extremely generous campaign financing system—opened the doors to new faces, new views and new organizations. No longer was elected office confined to those having broad citywide appeal; the threshold became 25% of the votes in one quarter of the city. Under this system, big money and inside players could be overcome by community organizing and populist pitches.

So who got excluded? The aforementioned old guard, of course. And now it appears that socialists, diversity champions and assorted others who didn’t catch the first wave may also be shut out in future elections. Of the six councilors up for reelection next month, early polls suggested that all would prevail. This despite ethical investigations, childish tirades, embarrassing private behavior and persistent deadlocks traceable to the three Democratic Socialists of America now on the ballot, yet all of them may cement their hold on incumbency.

The 25% threshold makes inclusion a one-time deal. Mere name familiarity counts for something in any election, and when coupled to a fringe but loyal base, incumbents could entrench even if a majority wants them gone. Picture Angelita Morillo in 40 years as an aging firebrand sticking to her guns.

Publicly funded campaigns compound the problem. Portland’s Small Donor Elections program awards a 10:1 match to campaign donations up to $25. Candidates having minimal voter support can nevertheless be prolific fundraisers under this system. In 2024, two City Council candidates who together failed to garner even 1,000 first place votes nevertheless collected more than 1,500 donors, for which the public had to shell out about $120,000 in matching funds.

This year, two DSA-aligned District 4 candidates, Jeremy Beausoleil-Smth and Jamey Evenstar, have received $236,000 in matching funds. The NW Examiner did not consider either a serious contender and did not invite them to a proposed debate among the top four candidates. For that reason, DSA member and incumbent District 4 Councilor Mitch Green refused to participate in the debate, and the host venue, the Armory, canceled rather than face a possible legal challenge due to its nonprofit status.

Another nonprofit, City Club of Portland, using fundraising as a criteria, included all six of the aforementioned candidates in its debate. In this way, the Small Donor Elections program gave borderline candidates leverage to be taken seriously, and a district that is nowhere near half socialist had a debate in which half of the candidates were.

Under our novel ranked-choice voting system, the three socialists are not rivals but teammates. Any votes garnered by the weaker two candidates will likely transfer to Green in the early rounds of vote counting, giving him at least a slight boost. More importantly, the auxiliary candidates broadened the dissemination of their message and financially aided the building of their political organization.

Lest anyone believe DSA candidates share only a general philosophy, Olivia Katbi, who co-chairs the Portland DSA chapter, said, “Our councilors are DSA. So what they are doing is DSA until further notice, unless we say it’s not.”

This is a disciplined political organization demanding loyalty far greater than our traditional parties expect. Its goals include “fully abolishing the police and prison system, which protects the rich and jails the poor.”

According to a 2026 post in the Portland DSA newsletter, “[O]ur goal isn’t to win just a single match; it’s to take home the trophy. (That means one day wholly defeating capitalism and creating a society for the benefit of all people, not just the billionaires.) To do that, it’s the job of our socialists in office and our movement to construct and take advantage of moments where we can beat back the capitalist forces and their faux-gressive candidates.”

This is partisanship squared, beyond anything we’ve seen in recent Portland history. No matter what folks were thinking in 2022, 96% of the 252 readers who took our online poll said they wanted the charter amended “as soon as possible.” I don’t think 25% winners taking it all would fare well among the electorate as a whole if that proposition were put to a simple yes-no test.