Chief petitioner to continue to collect signatures in effort to put initiative up for vote on May 19

By Damian Mann for Ashland.news

Ashland Mayor Tonya Graham cast the tie-breaking vote Monday night that rejected placing a ballot-measure before residents in May to require voter approval to increase fees on utility bills.

The split City Council vote came after a sometimes testy debate, including over a potential increase in electric rates.

Graham asked councilors to say “yes” or “no” on whether they supported taking formal action to place the ballot measure on an upcoming election.

Councilor Eric Hansen, who voted “no” on the ballot measure, criticized Ashland resident George Kramer, who is leading the ballot measure campaign.

Hansen, who didn’t refer to Kramer by name, said he was concerned about his motivations.

“There were disinformation campaigns launched by the author of this ballot measure on the food and beverage initiative and wastewater treatment initiative, and the parks initiative,” he said.

Hansen said, “This is an individual who has an ax to grind with the city of Ashland.”

Graham cautioned, “We do not personalize issues here.”

When Hansen attempted to continue, Graham said, “Stick with the policy question.”  She said council rules require not denigrating or calling anybody names.

“That also means (not) casting aspersions on anyone’s motivations,” Graham said.

Hansen then said, “I will just say for the record that this person has run for councilor and mayor.”

After Hansen’s commentary, Graham explained why she was opposing the ballot measure.

Graham described a “perfect storm” that involved state revenue issues that put constant downward pressures on the general funds of cities throughout Oregon.

She said the city is still struggling through post-COVID, which pumped extra dollars into cities, as well as years of inflationary pressures.

Graham said the increase in fees was necessary to correct for a “singular event.”

“Nobody wanted to put these fees in place,” she said.

She said that the council is aware that fees are an issue for the community, pointing out that the $5 park fee will last two years and prevents severe cutback in park services for the community.

“In my mind, this ballot measure is not the way to correct this,” she said.

Kramer has been collecting signatures to place the ballot measure in either the May primary or November general election next year.

He previously requested the council approve placing it on the ballot instead of collecting the 1,308 signatures of Ashland voters to qualify for the ballot.

Before the council study session Monday, Kramer said his signature campaign already has about half the 1,500 signatures needed to account for potential invalid signatures.

On Facebook, Kramer stated after the council rejected the ballot measure, “What this is really about is whether you trust the Ashland City Council with unchecked authority to extract money from all of us with minimal oversight. I do not. They have not demonstrated any ability to use this power wisely and I expect them to go back to fees in the future, if only because it’s easier than actually managing our exploding budget.”

Councilor Dylan Bloom voted in favor of placing the measure on the ballot, but said he would actively campaign against it.

“For me this is about regaining trust with the community,” he said.

Bloom said he was also concerned that some people might spread misinformation about the ballot measure.

He said he’s hopeful that the city will look at code changes that haven’t been updated since the city changed from a city administrator form of government to a city manager form.

“What we have is a complete breakdown in our city code,” he said.

Councilor Gina DuQuenne, who has opposed fee hikes, said fee increases add up and place a burden on many residents, some of whom may have two or three jobs.

“I would like the voters to have an opportunity to vote on this,” she said. “I do believe the citizens of Ashland have the ability to make the right decision.”

Councilor Bob Kaplan, who voted against the measure, said, “I think there are grave defects in the way the ballot measure is being worded.”

Councilor Jeff Dahle voted against the ballot measure.

“For me, this is completely about the process,” he said

He said he’s hopeful that a planned December retreat of the City Council will help develop strategies to deal with city budget issues and to address concerns about fees.

Councilor Derek Sherrell, who supports placing the ballot measure before voters, said, “This measure will be on the ballot whether we like it or not.”

Rate study discussion tabled

In other study session business, the council was supposed to consider information about an electric rate study that could lead to a 3.9% increase in rates, which would, according to the one-page staff report, “result in a $2.99 per month increase in the average residential bill.”

Bloom said no background information was available in the agenda packet, so he wasn’t able to do any homework prior to the meeting.

“How can we make those informed decisions without the supporting documentation. How can we wing it?”

The council decided to postpone looking at the rate study and other documentation until a later date.

“Something this big — it would be good to have a little bit more time,” Sherrell said. Regarding rate increases, he said, “We need to get our hackles up.”

Mark Beauchamp, a consultant with Utility Financial Solutions, said he’d just prepared some of the documentation earlier Monday.

“We don’t need feedback tonight,” he said.

Graham said she thought the council had previously asked to be read in early in the process of developing these reports, particularly regarding rate increases.

“What we’ve just done now is, we’ve said, well, ‘wait — we don’t want to see it until its firmly baked.'”

She said it is important to get information early on.

“It’s another opportunity to give feedback before the draft report,” she said.

DuQuenne said, “All information needs to be included in the packet.”

Kaplan said he recalled making an objection about another instance when the information wasn’t included in the packet for a study session.

“Nobody actually followed me on that,” he said. “It seems to me this council is being very arbitrary.”

Bloom said, “This is not the first time that we’ve done things inconsistently.”

Dahle said, “We haven’t learned from our mistakes.”

He said the city needs to get as much information as possible leading up to a rate increase.

“This is too important and has too many moving pieces,” Dahle said.

Reach freelance writer Damian Mann at dmannnews@gmail.com.