Feature  

How Portland, Oregon Embraced Voting Reform — and Democratic Innovation

Portland, Oregon passed one of the most progressive voting reforms in the country. Max Kiefel, Nick Chedli Carter, and Archon Fung explore the motivating factors behind this big change.

Photo of a building with a sign that says

In 2022, amid a cultural shift and a barrage of sensationalist headlines, Portland, Oregon passed some of the most expansive voting reforms by a major American city in recent history. Measure 26-228 revised the city’s charter, expanding the number of City Council members from four to twelve and electing them in four multi-member districts rather than at-large districts. Additionally, it introduced ranked choice voting and a professional city administrator. These changes aimed to diversify representation and ensure a more equitable distribution of power across the city. “These reforms were both significant and surprising, representing the city’s most fundamental changes in over a century,” note Max Kiefel, Nick Chedli Carter, and Archon Fung in a newly published case study examining Portland’s innovative approach to charter reform.

Using articles, meeting minutes, reports, and interviews, Kiefel, Carter, and Fung document the reform process for scholars, elected officials, and advocates while seeking to answer the question: why now? Between 1907 and 2007, there were at least seven ballot initiatives aimed at reforming Portland’s commission governance structure. They all failed, often focusing more on consolidating mayoral power rather than improving democratic processes. “Why then, in 2022, was voting representation and democratic reform firmly on the agenda, and did this contribute to Portland finally voting for change?” ask the authors.

On one hand, the authors found that Portland’s government was overdue for change. Portland, Oregon is a progressive city where nearly 74% of the population is white. Until recently, the City Council, too, was overwhelmingly made up of white men. Many attributed this lack of representation to its government structure; before Measure 26-228 passed, Portland was the only city in America retaining the commission form of government. The system led to a host of problems, including poor coordination, a lack of long-term planning, and general inefficiencies. In addition, many were concerned that the commission form was more amenable to advantaged citizens.

Against this backdrop, Portland found itself in a unique situation in 2022. It had just emerged from some of the most stringent COVID-19 restrictions in the country, and the city’s intense protests in the wake of George Floyd’s murder had led to “a widespread perception that Portland was ‘broken.’” At the same time, the city was approaching its second decennial charter review process, requiring the City Council to convene a Charter Review Commission. The process “provided a readymade institution to enable the willing to engage in reform.”

The authors found that this broader political and structural context primed Portlanders to vote for democratic reform in 2022 and “created a permissive environment for issues of minority representation and voting rights to feature prominently in any reform proposals.” However, “ … this does not necessarily explain why earlier attempts at charter reform lacked the scope of proposals in Measure 26-228.” While the 2020-2022 Charter Review Commission proposed the specific reforms that were included in Measure 26-228, the authors credit a broad coalition of grassroots organizations, minority communities advocating for better representation, and progressive activists with developing the reforms and priming Portlanders to embrace them.

In fact, advocates and activists initiated critical organizing efforts as early as 2014, then leveraged years of advocacy and community organizing to build momentum for reform, despite facing opposition from established political figures and business interests. “Their organizing efforts proved valuable in building sufficient pressure to resist opponents’ attempts to stymie the reform before and after the public vote … Specifically, they identified the Charter Review Commission as an opportunity to influence city reform by positioning themselves and allies to influence the commission’s agenda once appointed.” While the timing was right for Measure 26-228, the authors believe that it would not have passed in its current form without a concerted effort and long-term commitment from key community members.

While the timing was right for Measure 26-228, the authors believe that it would not have passed in its current form without a concerted effort and long-term commitment from key community members.

Dana Guterman

At the time of the case study’s publication, Portland had passed the reforms and was in the process of implementing them. In the months and years ahead, these changes will play out. Time will tell if the reforms are “successful” and, if so, what other cities can learn from Portland’s charter reform experience “as they look to introduce voter reforms that arguably deepen the democratic character of local government institutions.”

Related Resources

Terms of Engagement – Orbán’s Ouster: Impacts on Budapest, Brussels, MAGA, and Beyond

Podcast

Terms of Engagement – Orbán’s Ouster: Impacts on Budapest, Brussels, MAGA, and Beyond

Princeton University Professor Kim Lane Scheppele, who studies the nexus of autocracy and constitutional democracy, joins Terms of Engagement hosts Archon Fung and Stephen Richer to discuss the recent resounding electoral defeat of Hungary’s longtime authoritarian prime minister, Viktor Orbán, and its potential ripple effects.

Terms of Engagement – How did the Democrats Lose Silicon Valley? Should They Try to Get it Back?
A photo of Silicon Valley with the Terms of Engagement logo and a headshot of Van Jones.

Podcast

Terms of Engagement – How did the Democrats Lose Silicon Valley? Should They Try to Get it Back?

The relationship between Silicon Valley and the Democratic Party has undergone a dramatic shift over the past decade, with many tech leaders moving away from their once-strong political alignment. This special episode of Terms of Engagement explores what drove that change and what it means for the future of democracy, political power, and the influence of technology elites.

Terms of Engagement – Sedition, Partisanship, and the Future of American Justice

Podcast

Terms of Engagement – Sedition, Partisanship, and the Future of American Justice

Former Assistant U.S. Attorney Troy Edwards, who was a leading prosecutor in the case of the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol, joins Terms of Engagement to discuss the Trump Administration’s move to vacate the seditious conspiracy convictions of the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys and what it means for the future of the Department of Justice and the rule of law.

More on this Issue

Voter Experience Summit Recap

Commentary

Voter Experience Summit Recap

Allen Lab Fellow Hillary Lehr convened a Voter Experience Summit at Harvard’s Ash Center in March, bringing together 25 cross-sector experts to rigorously map the voter journey. This essay explores how that collaborative process could lay the groundwork for new interventions to understand and improve the experience of voting for all.

VIDEOS: After Neoliberalism From Left to Right

Additional Resource

VIDEOS: After Neoliberalism From Left to Right

After Neoliberalism: From Left to Right brought together hundreds of leading economists, political scientists, journalists, writers and thinkers from across the political spectrum to explore and debate emerging visions for the future of the political economy.

Panel videos below.

Storytelling Pathways to Civics Engagement

Additional Resource

Storytelling Pathways to Civics Engagement

Watch Roadtrip Nation’s Living Civics documentary and hear from leading universal civic learning experts on the power of narrative for civic engagement.