Portland’s Charter Commission has a lot to consider as it begins its once-a-decade obligation to review our city’s defining document. Government transparency should be at the top of the list.
Government transparency is the linchpin to ensuring the efficacy of any efforts this commission makes on how our city operates. Any obstacles to lawfully access public records — records kept with our tax dollars and in our name — undermines those efforts, including initiatives around police oversight reform, modifications to our government structure and improvements to our policymaking procedures.
Past efforts by journalists to work with the city to correct its transparency problems brought promises but little action.
In September 2018, more than a dozen reporters, including from Street Roots, held a formal meeting with Portland Mayor Ted Wheeler’s then-chief of staff, Michael Cox. The group met to highlight problems and call for reforms to transparency and records-handling practices.
Those problems include questionable denials, exorbitant and sometimes prohibitive fees for public documents, and long delays in completing requests.
In 2018, the same year reporters appealed to the city, The Oregonian ran a report outlining the dire condition of the city’s transparency. In its analysis, among other issues, The Oregonian found the average wait for a police report in 2017 was 133 days.
Based on the response from the mayor’s office during their meeting, the group of journalists was hopeful changes would be made. But no significant change was forthcoming.
This commission now has the opportunity to take up this critical issue and instill it into our city’s charter.
High fees act as barriers to the general public and news outlets with an obligation to report responsibly on government activities. For example, to obtain a single common police report, you are charged $30 up front before the city even begins processing your request. Fees accumulate quickly for even simple compilations of records.
In 2020, Street Roots’ senior reporter, Emily Green, testified before City Council on the suppressive impact these fees can have, to the point of forcing her to drop stories because of the high costs of obtaining the necessary public records. Regardless of stated intent, fees and delays shut down public oversight.
But this isn’t just about news outlets seeking documents. These fees and conditions apply to all residents of Portland — all taxpayers with a vested interest in their city’s actions. This is not a new concern. The need for greater transparency and accountability surfaces frequently in city audits across various government operations.
Lack of staff and inefficient systems are often cited by city bureaus for failing to rise to the level of Oregon’s pro-disclosure transparency laws. But these are challenges that can be overcome with the will to do so, driven by a directive from this body that the city aspires to the spirit of the law, with an imperative to hew toward transparency, rather than roadblocks.
It’s been done elsewhere, including San Francisco; Kirkland, Washington; and Madison, Wisconsin. Each of these cities incorporates government transparency as a paramount responsibility, not as a discretional courtesy, but as a foundation.
Portland needs to do the same, to promote sufficient data tracking systems, staffing and oversight designed to meet its core civic duty to provide an open government. The details can be refined in city policy, appropriate for each bureau and process, but transparency must become part of the city’s DNA.
Because whatever mandates or requirements a charter may codify for what city officials and its agents should and must do, transparency is the only assurance the public has to know what the city is actually doing.
To learn more about the Charter Review process or to testify at upcoming meetings, visit the city’s website.