Council Leadership Election Process
At a glance
Based on uploaded (human-made) captions.
- What: document 2026-378, a report from a work group that catalogued ways to change how the City Council elects its Council President and Vice President each January. It is a conversation starter: no legislation is proposed and the work group made no recommendation. Absent a change, the election is Wednesday, January 6, 2027, and the current rules apply.
- Where it stands: discussed October 21, 2026 with no vote. Councilor Kanal said it is tentatively scheduled to return as a discussion item on November 5, though that agenda is crowded.
- Why it matters: the last two years of leadership elections ran long amid 6-6 splits. Changing a Code section on the election (3.02, as read in the captions) would need an ordinance and legal analysis first.
The options in the report
- Six "pick one" options for a deadlock in which no candidate reaches seven votes: keep the status quo; the mayor breaks the tie; the incumbent stays on for a set time while voting continues; the incumbent must abstain; random chance such as flipping the "Portland penny"; automatic succession by the Vice President.
- About ten add-ons that can be layered on in any combination (for example a cooling-off period, a work session beforehand, an executive session, straw polls, ranked or STAR voting, and a rule that a candidate cannot preside). The work group was Councilors Avalos, Dunphy, Kanal, Pirtle-Guiney and Smith, as read in the captions.
Positions
- Smith: the Charter says the mayor breaks all ties, so the Council is writing around the law. She said legal counsel gave her permission to file for a declaratory judgment using city funds, and she does not want any piece of the work-around until that is settled. She cited a conversation with City Attorney Robert Taylor, who told her the Code does not supersede the Charter. Councilor Ryan agreed the Charter was clear when he voted on it, and Vice President Clark asked what a declaratory judgment would take; no attorney was in the room to say.
- Avalos: the problem is a governance and culture problem, not just a voting problem; do not confuse speed with effectiveness; the choice should stay with the Council, the process should be public, and the Council should first discuss what it wants from its leaders.
- Pirtle-Guiney: the options respond to two specific elections and could create problems in future, different splits (for example three candidates). Proposals that stop the President from presiding or voting are non-starters, as are options that assume someone is still in office. A voluntary cooling-off period helped last year; she would watch how much moves behind closed doors.
- Councilor Green: wants a rule adopted before the end of the year; 96 percent of the votes before the Council are resolved, so the issue is leadership and budget amendments. Interested in the coin toss, later favoring a work session, some executive session and STAR voting, with a coin flip for a rare tie. Open to a 13th councilor by Charter amendment but not soon.
- Kanal: favors option four (the incumbent must abstain), straw polling and a prior work session, and ending the election on the same calendar day, not by recessing; would like enumerated powers for the Vice President.
- Councilor Novick: more inclined to the coin flip after reading the report; favors a work session on expectations and some executive session; agrees with Smith on the Charter but thinks a mayor deciding Council leadership is a bad idea, so he would propose a Charter amendment for a 13th at-large councilor.
- Councilor Zimmerman: would never support a penny flip or asking someone not to vote, which he sees as probably a Charter violation; prefers little or no change and a leader who can build a coalition and stay in place while doing well.
- Ryan: favors the status quo plus a work session, no executive session, yes to cooling off, and the incumbent stays on if deadlocked; has heard no public appetite for more seats.
- Clark (online, ill) found option four interesting but agreed with Green that forcing the Vice President to carry it would be a sentence.
Sources
- https://www.portland.gov/council/agenda/committee-whole/2026/10/21
- Video: https://youtube.com/watch?v=9tj8iK-ucLE (uploaded human captions)
Discussion time
About 40 minutes across 1 meeting (from transcript timestamps; approximate).
| Meeting | Minutes |
|---|---|
| 2026-10-21 - Finance & Governance Committee (Whole) | 40 |
Log
- 2026-10-21 - Finance & Governance Committee (Whole) - Work group report and a round of first reactions; no vote; likely back as a discussion item November 5.