By the time you’re reading this, Bend’s first mayor to be directly elected in nearly a century will have cast her last votes at her final city council meeting, and likely, Bend will have a new mayor. Sally Russell announced earlier this month that she would be stepping down following the May 18 council meeting, citing exhaustion as the reason for leaving the post before her term expires around the end of this year. Just before this issue went to press, Councilor Rita Schenkelberg (they/them), also announced their resignation, saying that both vitriolic public opinion about them, and time constraints in managing a job and public office, necessitated the departure.
Suffice it to say that this is a low point in modern Bend politics. Losing not just a councilor, but also Bend’s mayor mid-stream is a concerning state of affairs.
City leaders—and voters—nurtured a great idea with 2018’s voted-upon change to the city charter, which moved the mayoral election process from one decided upon by fellow councilors to one where the public decides who’s to be mayor.
Thus far, it is not going well.
It was an idea that promised more buy-in from the public, and in turn a stronger democracy. What we’ve gotten is bitter, ugly politics ever since.
At least one of the candidates in that first mayor’s race left town after losing. Now, the victor is leaving before her term is even over, and someone will be appointed to fill the slot, along with the slot Schenkelberg is vacating.
The end result is that we will now have more appointed officials, when what we wanted was more public participation.
In Russell’s case, this crisis of leadership came without any outward accusations of fraud or impropriety or illegality; no massive scandals to speak of. Less-scrupulous and more-embattled politicians have faced far more pressure and have stuck it out in their positions.
We have weighed in before about “The Doubt We Sow When We Appoint Politicians,” as we outlined in our Feb. 3, 2022 editorial, but it’s a notion worth revisiting now that our mayor and a councilor have resigned all inside a week.
We said then and we’ll say again: Many of the cracks that became rifts in Bend city politics can be traced to the appointment of Chris Piper to the Bend City Council in 2019.
Piper came in to fill the council slot Russell vacated when she became mayor. Piper did not win re-election during the 2020 election but is now running for mayor in the November election. Now, with Russell’s departure, the Bend City Council will appoint a temporary mayor to fill the slot until one can once again become democratically elected. That appointed person may very well be someone who is also running for mayor in November. If a sitting councilor becomes mayor, then they’ll need to vacate their councilor slot, and yet another person could be appointed to the rank and file of the Bend City Council… with another right behind it when Schenkelberg resigns Wednesday night.
We’ll likely know who the new mayor is Wednesday night—and like the appointment of Piper, which was fraught with accusations of back-room dealings between Russell and city influencers, including a representative of the Central Oregon Builders Association—the appointment of this person could sow more doubt, confusion and lack of faith in local government.
Because Bend’s charter dictates that vacant seats must be filled within 30 days or go unfilled until the next election, there’s no good way to go about this. Bend needs leadership now more than ever and leaving the mayor’s seat or the remaining council seats open would be just another kind of miscarriage of justice. After so recently voting to be able to name our mayor, we’re right back to having a de facto popularity contest and a set of council appointments that just begs the back-room dealers of Bend to clamor for influence. Hopefully, the council gets it right this time and rises above the sordid political pressure, and then we can all put this initial chapter of mayoral politics behind us.
Along with that, may we also remember that these, too, are human beings—and that vitriolic behavior on social media has consequences—both human and political.
This article appears in Source Weekly May 19, 2022.
MAKE LOCAL JOURNALISM HAPPEN
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
What we’re hearing is the sound of Bend’s taxpayers realizing no one among our current city councilors represents property taxpayers. Nearly all of this city council’s priorities risk negatively affecting Bend’s property values.
Rita and Sally will be fine. In return for delivering Bend into liberal control, they’ll receive job offers that pay a salary from Salem’s bureaucrats, Portland’s liberal NGOs or Oregon’s D.C. politicos.
This Article concerns me some. Are there any facts about Chris Piper? The article leads one to believe that Mr. Piper is dishonest. Can this be backed up by facts? I do not know Mr. Piper, and would ask this about anyone being attacked without back up proof. Thank you.
I think the appointment process for the two replacements will be open and honest. Their terms as selectees will last until Jan. 2023. If either or both wish to remain on the City Council, then they would have to run for election this Nov. Fortunately, we have a wealth of community-spirited people in Bend who would be willing and able to repopulate the City Council.
I don’t think this editorial implies that Chris Piper is dishonest. The fact is that his candidacy for the 2019 vacancy emerged late in the process and was heavily promoted by the real estate lobby, the builders lobby and the Chamber of Commerce, all of whom said in their own way that they preferred Piper to a woman of color who was a very qualified candidate. They were able to sway the votes of Sally Russell and Bruce Abernethy, who caved to the powerful in town. It is worth noting that in recent elections these three groups (COBA, COAR, CofC) have spent way more money than any other groups in town to elect CC candidates. They have failed at this, including in the last election when appointee Piper lost the only election he has run in. These groups have an agenda and it is not hard to figure out what it is. They have run the town for years and are pissed that they have lost some of their power. Less power = less profit. They will heavily-fund Piper’s run for Mayor. While all of this is not necessarily corruption, it is corrupting the democratic process.
The City Council positions should not be about politics or activism. These are non partisan positions. When one applies for this position, it should be understood that when you enter a CC chamber or engage in city business, you need to hang your political party hat at the door as well as your activism hat as this role is about serving our community for the greater good. It is about listening to the public and trying to help our community grow in a functional and connected way. It is not about politics.
Fosterfell above I hope would be correct in his opinion but I don’t think the comment should have been posted as his spouse is a city councilor so that is a biased view.
I am actually relieved that Rita stepped down although I voted for them. Rita unfortunately missed a grand opportunity to represent the BILAPOC and LGBTQ communities while serving the entire community with grace and diplomacy. Instead Rita went into the position like an activist, usually annoyed with our residents and held an attitude of frustration instead of openness and curiosity creating a divide from the beginning. Rita lacked maturity and diplomacy and failed in not representing everyone as the position calls for. It is extremely disappointing in my eyes for those communities they represent. I believe Chris Piper will listen to our community and is ready and grounded to serve as Mayor. I am an independent but I lean left and Chris Piper with an (R) behind his name has my vote. I know he will leave his party hat and agenda at the door. I have had a few conversations with him as I now vet my votes. He is a stand up guy and understands the role.
Of course the city council should be about politics, that’s it’s function. The councilors are charged with distilling the views and opinions of the city’s citizens into actionable programs. The administration of those programs should be non-partisan but asking the council to be non-partisan/non-political defeats the whole purpose.
For Ms. Perullo, I am simply here spelling out the appointment process and, as well, stating my confidence in the community–nothing controversial there. But, if she prefers I identify myself as a city councilor spouse, then–fine–I will proclaim that fact each time with transparency and pride.
My appreciation to her for using her actual name. Like her, I don’t prefer to hide behind a pseudonym.
Ms. Perullo is known and appreciated for her advocacy of high-barrier facilities for unhoused individuals. It should be known that the current City Council–in addition to other projects–has partnered to build Veterans Village, a universally applauded high-barrier facility.
However, since we don’t currently have the funding to build enough high-barrier facilities to accommodate everyone in need, I would really (really!) like to know from Ms. Perullo what the City should do instead.
Fosterfell, The city should be partnering with the county, put politics aside and expand and or replicate the Bethlehem Inn model, which is a high barrier facility. Buying up millions of dollars of motels and using additional monies to rehab them is not sustainable for our city nor is it safe for our community members. If you want people to be in all neighborhoods, the CC should be focusing on affordable housing and hold the developers in this town who drive code to be accountable for making sure they have deed restricted properties in ALL areas of this town. Putting “low barrier” shelters in neighborhoods, near parks and schools is not appropriate, safe or fair to anyone. They are putting the burden on residents who purchased their homes feeling a sense of peace and a big investment. It would also behove the CC, city planning department as well as Eric King to listen to the community members and acknowledge that the people who are residents of this community want our community to be safe, and we are not “casting aside” houseless, we simply want safe high barrier shelters for everyone who is experiencing houselessness. People like myself who are advocating for this want safety first for all. It was touching listening to the young lady from Bend High who was expressing appreciation to the CC for passing the low barrier shelter code amendments. However, those advocating for high barrier are actually trying to keep her houseless friends safe because there is a great chance that her friend could get sexually harassed , raped, introduced to drugs or the like because they would be in a low barrier shelter exposed to that sort of thing. Low barrier is simply not safe and just acts as a band aide for the houseless. It doesn’t create real change for them. Even high barrier only has a 65% success rate. City of Bend really needs to invest in high barrier with the county because this is part of our infrastructure and we certainly don’t want an unsafe community. This is part of growing into a big city. And if the CC council was that interested in what I have to say FosterFell, they would have invited me to a meeting to discuss instead of not working with me, especially since I serve on the board of an NA and I talk to community members every day about this. Instead, they act like I am the enemy which is actually not doing their jobs to serve our community.