Sweet Home attorney, committee propose broad charter revisions; council asks for redlined text and ballot options

City Attorney Blair Larson and members of the Charter Review Committee walked the Sweet Home City Council through a package of proposed changes to the city charter at a Jan. work session, urging careful review and pointing to legal risk in one provision the committee narrowed after a federal court decision.

Larson said the committee spent months reviewing the charter line-by-line and recommended updates ranging from formatting and modernized job titles to substantive changes affecting vacancies, residency, and the council’s relationship with city staff. "I recommend that you pay very careful attention to the changes that they're recommending," Larson said, adding the committee also pared back language that could be vulnerable to a First Amendment challenge in light of a case involving the City of Corvallis.

Why it matters: The charter defines how Sweet Home’s government operates. The council must decide which proposed changes, if any, to send to voters and how to package them on the ballot — as a single new charter or as multiple, single-subject measures — a choice with legal and political consequences.

Key proposals and council concerns Larson summarized several substantive proposals: adding a chapter-1 statement clarifying when the charter version was adopted; a Chapter 2 process to fill a council seat if a councilor is elected mayor midterm; renaming the treasurer office to "treasurer/finance director;" clarifying required residency (one year before election or appointment); and setting the commencement of terms to Jan. 1. He said Chapter 4 would offer vacancies first to the two highest runners-up (if eligible), set a 60-day timeline for council appointments when required, and clarify a quorum when three or more seats are vacant.

On attendance, the committee proposes that a councilor with 10 or more unexcused absences in a 365-day period be ineligible to run in the next election. "We changed it to be an eligibility to run as opposed to being disciplined and removed from office," said Gary Jarvis, a Charter Review Committee member.

Larson said Chapter 6 clarifies city-officer duties and authorizes the council to set the bond amount for the city manager ("which is currently set at $10,000"), and it would allow a city manager pro tem to serve up to 18 months with reappointment every six months. Changes to ordinances would allow reading by title only and remove a requirement for physical posting of past ordinances where electronic copies are available.

Interference clause and legal risk A focal point of the meeting was the committee’s rewrite of a long-standing "interference in administration" clause. Larson said the existing provision — which previously allowed removal or forfeiture for attempts to influence personnel or procurement — was similar to language the federal courts scrutinized in a Corvallis case. "The language in their charter was very, very similar to ours in that area," Larson said, adding that the Corvallis provision had been struck down on free-speech grounds. To reduce legal risk, the draft narrows council contact with employees: council members must deal with employees subject to the city manager’s supervision only through the city manager and must not give orders directly to staff.

Ballot packaging and next steps Council members asked whether the changes should go to voters as one new charter or as separate, single-subject questions. Larson said both are possible; a new, single-chapter charter ballot is an option but he will do additional legal research on compliance with the single-subject statutory requirement. "There are different ways to do it, and we want to make sure that we're in compliance with the law," he said.

Larson said staff can prepare a redlined (strikethrough/underline) comparison showing the old language and the proposed edits; several councilors requested that version for their next review. He also said the changes would not be ready for the coming November election and that the earliest feasible submission would be next May, with statutory filing deadlines likely around February.

Public information and campaign limits Larson reminded the council that while the city may spend money to provide neutral information on options, city staff cannot use city resources to urge a particular vote. A councilor noted Linn County and the state have limited funding for voter pamphlets, meaning the city may need to budget for explanatory materials to inform voters.

What happens next Council members asked staff to produce a strikethrough/redline version that shows deletions and insertions and to return with that document and any requested legal opinions at a future work session. The work session adjourned at 06:14.

Attributions: Quotes and detailed points in this article are taken from the work-session discussion and presentation by City Attorney Blair Larson and committee member Gary Jarvis. Other council discussion is described and attributed where the transcript identifies the speaker.