Vanessa Nordyke makes closing argument for Salem’s livability levy

City Councilor Vanessa Nordyke is an attorney. Today she made a presentation to the Salem City Club that she called a closing argument for Measure 24-514 on the May ballot -- which is unofficially called the livability levy, being a property tax increase to fund the library, parks, and Center 50+. Nordyke said that she chose her black suit because it's what she likes to wear to a closing argument. "Closing," because ballots need to be postmarked on or before May 20, or put in a drop box before 8 pm on the 20th. That's just eleven days away. Here's…

Mai Vang is best choice for Ward 6 city council seat in May 20 election

There are three candidates running in the May 20 special election to fill the remaining term in the Ward 6 city council seat that was vacated by Julie Hoy when she was elected Mayor of Salem last year.  Mai Vang, Deanna Garcia, and Logan Lor all deserve credit for stepping up to the citizen activism plate and taking a swing at being elected to this time-consuming zero-pay volunteer position. I believe Mai Vang is most deserving of Ward 6 votes, and I say this only partly because she is endorsed by Progressive Salem, which happens to be my political "tribe."…

Public records show only one city official did right thing in Stahley debacle

Yesterday the Salem Reporter, our city's excellent online publication, ran a great story based on documents received from the City of Salem via a public records request concerning the forced resignation of City Manager Keith Stahley last month. Journalist Joe Siess wrote "Records reveal Nishioka wanted to sue Hoy after Stahley resigned." The story starts off with a bang. Salem Council President Linda Nishioka felt so misled by Mayor Julie Hoy over the city manager’s exit that she considered suing her, newly-released public records show. Nishioka sought advice from some of her fellow councilors on how to do that, according…

Here’s my Oregon Government Ethics Commission complaint about Keith Stahley’s forced resignation

I am submitting this complaint to the Oregon Government Ethics Commission in the form of a post on one of my blogs because the complaint is lengthy owing to the complexity of this matter, which would have made it difficult to file the necessary information on the Commission's web site.

In addition, by consolidating all of that information in a single document, I felt this would make it easier for Commission staff to read and understand the issue at hand: whether Salem Mayor Julie Hoy engaged in prohibited serial communications involving the forced resignation of City Manager Keith Stahley.

This complaint is in three sections: (1) Grievance notice sent to City of Salem; (2) Response to grievance notice by City of Salem: (3) My comments on City of Salem response to the grievance. Due to the length of this complaint, I've inserted a page break after section (1). Simply click on the notice of the page break to read the rest of the complaint. There are a few formatting and font problems in the complaint, a result of copying and pasting from other documents, but the problems don't interfere with readability.

(1) Grievance notice sent to City of Salem

TO: Acting City Manager Namburi, Mayor Hoy, City Attorney Atchison, city councilors, and other city officials
FROM: Brian Hines
RE: revised Oregon Government Ethics Commission grievance notice

Please consider this my revised grievance notice to the notice I sent you last night. After reading a story in today’s Statesman Journal about Stahley’s resignation, I’ve added mention of a part of that story as it demonstrates that Mayor Hoy told Councilor Nishioka that a majority of City Council members wanted Stahley to resign, and edited some other parts accordingly.
 
In accordance with the policy of the Oregon Government Ethics Commission that before a complaint alleging a violation of the Public Meetings Law can be submitted, the public body at issue — in this case the City of Salem — has to be given 21 days to respond to a written grievance setting forth the facts and circumstances of the alleged violation, this email sent on February 16, 2025 is that written grievance. 
 
Official FlashAlert communications from the City of Salem provide a primary basis for my grievance. Stories published by the Salem Reporter and the Statesman Journal also will be used to support this grievance. 
 
The issue at hand is the recent forced resignation of City Manager Keith Stahley. It appears that Mayor Hoy violated Or. Admin. Code 199-050-0020 dealing with the prohibition of serial communications. However, there may have been additional violations of Oregon law and administrative rules.
 
On February 13, a FlashAlert was sent out titled “A Statement From the City of Salem Regarding the City Manager’s Resignation.” A timeline comprised most of the communication. On February 15, a FlashAlert was sent out titled “Salem City Attorney’s Statement Concerning Keith Stahley’s Resignation.” 
 
I’ll use excerpts from these to make my case for this grievance, supplementing that information with information from two Salem Reporter stories, both by Joe Siess: “Mayor Julie Hoy set in motion events that led to Keith Stahley’s abrupt resignation” (February 13) and “Councilor Micki Varney breaks the silence about city manager’s resignation” (February 14), and a Statesman Journal story by Whitney Woodworth “Salem city councilor calls for transparency after city manager’s exit” (February 16).
 
This saga began at some undisclosed date when, according to the city, "Mayor Julie Hoy had individual communications with different members of City Council concerning Keith Stahley's performance and potential separation from the City.” The Salem Reporter learned that Councilors Micki Varney and Shane Matthews had talked with Hoy by phone. In addition a city communication says that Hoy "spoke on the phone with Councilor Linda Nishioka.”
 
So Mayor Hoy, a member of the City Council herself, spoke with at least three other councilors about Stahley (four, actually, since we can assume Hoy speaks to herself). The Salem Reporter has gotten "no comment" from Councilors Nordyke and Tigan about this, adding "Hoy and Councilors Deanna Gwyn, Irvin Brown, and Nishioka haven’t responded to emailed questions about when they decided the matter of Stahley’s resignation and to whom they communicated that decision.”
 
The current membership of the City Council is eight, as one seat on the nine-member council is vacant. Thus at a minimum, Mayor Hoy had spoken with half of the City Council (again, including herself) about Stahley’s performance and potential separation from the city via resignation or firing prior to Nishioka’s meeting with Stahley on February 7. And as noted below, the Statesman Journal story indicates that Hoy spoke with a majority of the council members.
 
Regarding that meeting: there is no evidence that prior to February 7, anyone on the City Council had  expressed to Hoy a desire for Stahley to resign. In fact, according to the Salem Reporter, on February 2 Varney had told Hoy that she needed more information to make a decision either way, and Matthews told Hoy that he didn’t indicate support for Stahley’s resignation. 
 
However, it is entirely possible that of the remaining six councilors on the current eight-member City Council, five (including Hoy) expressed a desire for Stahley to resign or be fired during the talks Hoy had with councilors. That would be a majority of the council. Since we know that Hoy spoke with three councilors, it seems likely that she spoke with all seven of her fellow councilors. In fact, the Statesman Journal story says tthis about a statement Councilor Nishioka released on February 15.
Nishioka said a discussion with Hoy led to her reaching out to Stahley. She said Hoy told her a majority of councilors believed Stahley should resign.
On February 7 Councilor Nishioka met with Stahley after meeting with Hoy. There’s no dispute that Nishioka asked Stahley if he would consider resigning. A key question that spurred this grievance is what Nishioka told Stahley. In a February 9 resignation letter that followed his meeting with Nishioka that was included in the February 13 Salem Reporter story, Stahley said, in part:
I understand the desire of the Mayor and Council to move forward and have a fresh start. I hope that my resignation per Section 14: Severance (b) (3) of my contract will help to facilitate that.
 
am submitting this resignation based on meeting that I had with Councilor Nishioka on Friday February 7, 2025, where she represented that she was the duly authorized representative of the Mayor and a majority of City Council and requested that I tender my resignation. 
Note that Stahley says that Nishioka represented herself as being both a duly authorized representative of the Mayor and a majority of the City Council. Since Nishioka is president of the entire City Council, her saying that she was a representative of a majority of the council clearly indicates that she’s speaking here about whether Stahley has the support of that majority to remain in that position. 
 
Obviously Stahley was told by Nishioka that a majority wanted him gone, or he wouldn’t have resigned two days after his meeting with Nishioka. 
 
The key point here is that the only way Nishioka could have known that a majority of the City Council wanted Stahley to resign or be fired was if Mayor Hoy had told Nishioka this in their meeting prior to February 7. This is precisely what the Statesman Journal story says, referencing a statement from Nishioka. The February 13 city communication says:

Due to public meeting law limitations, Councilor Nishioka was concerned that speaking with other members of Council about this issue would violate the law. She relied on her understanding of the situation after speaking with Mayor Julie Hoy.

So how would Nishioka be able to tell Stahley that she represented a majority on the City Council that wanted him gone? Because Mayor Hoy didn’t have the concerns about breaking Oregon’s public meeting law that Nishioka did. Hoy engaged in what’s known as prohibited serial communications under Or. Admin. Code 199-050-0020. It states:

A quorum of the members of a governing body shall not, outside of a meeting conducted in compliance with the Public Meetings Law, use a series of communications of any kind, directly or through intermediaries, for the purpose of deliberating or deciding on any matter that is within the jurisdiction of the governing body.

The prohibited methods of communication include in-person; telephone calls; emails; and such, including “any other means of conveying information.” Deciding whether to keep a City Manager on the job is within the jurisdiction of the City Council. 
 
In his resignation letter, Stahley said that Nishioka told him that she represented a majority of the City Council and requested that he tender his resignation. This is strong evidence that Hoy engaged in a prohibited serial communication with members of the City Council and instructed Nishioka to tell Stahley that he should resign. Again, Nishioka said that she avoided talking with her fellow councilors about this, so it was Hoy who concluded through her serial communications that a majority wanted Stahley gone.
 
Legally, it doesn’t matter whether Hoy spoke truthfully with Nishioka about this. What matters is that Nishioka, putting herself forward to Stahley as a representative of a majority of the City Council, asked Stahley to resign. This action needed to take place at a public meeting, not via a series of private phone calls or other communications Mayor Hoy had with city councilors.
 
In the February 15 communication that was the city attorney’s statement concerning Stahley’s resignation, City Attorney Atchison said about Nishioka’s meeting with Stahley:

At that meeting, Councilor Nishioka asked Keith Stahley if he would consider resigning. Councilor Nishioka never said that she was City Council’s “duly authorized representative" or implied she was speaking on behalf of City Council.

However, what Stahley said in his resignation letter directly contradicts what the city attorney claimed in the quotation above. 
 
This is one reason I’m initiating an inquiry by the Oregon Government Ethics Commission: to resolve the question of whether Mayor Hoy and possibly other city officials engaged in prohibited serial communications that caused, in Stahley’s view, a request by a majority of the City Council for him to resign — even though no public meeting of the council had been held regarding this issue.
 
I want to note something misleading in the February 15 statement by the city attorney. Atchison said:

Stahley’s resignation letter stated that Nishioka said she was “the duly authorized representative of City Council" acting on Council’s behalf. That language is straight from Stahley’s employment agreement concerning severance benefits. Stahley used that exact language apparently because it was consistent with the language in his employment agreement concerning his eligibility for severance, not because Nishioka ever uttered those words.

There are several problems with this assertion by the city attorney. First, the quote Atchison shared, the part in quotation marks above, isn’t in Stahley’s resignation letter, which actually said:

am submitting this resignation based on meeting that I had with Councilor Nishioka on Friday February 7, 2025, where she represented that she was the duly authorized representative of the Mayor and a majority of City Council and requested that I tender my resignation. 

I’m virtually 100% sure that this language isn’t in Stahley’s employment agreement. So the city attorney was wrong when he claimed that Stahley was echoing the language in the employment agreement. Second, the city attorney doesn’t know why Stahley said what he did in his resignation letter. That’s why Atchison included “apparently” in his conjecture that Nishioka never said that she was the duly authorized representative of the Mayor and a majority of the City Council. Basically, the city attorney is accusing Stahley of lying.
 
Here’s a much more likely reason Stahley said what he did: it was the truth as he remembered it from the meeting with Nishioka that occurred just two days before he wrote his resignation letter.
 
Lastly, I want to share Councilor Varney’s public statement about the resignation of Keith Stahley that appeared in a February 14 Salem Reporter story by Joe Siess, “Councilor Micki Varney breaks the silence about city manager’s resignation.” It provides a valuable perspective from the only member of the City Council who has issued a public statement about this disturbing action that, as argued above, seems to violate Oregon’s public meeting law.

“I write this feeling great sadness and regret at what has transpired over the past week. It has eroded the trust and transparency we as a Council have been trying to rebuild over the past year.

The public has every right to, and deserves, an explanation of the events leading up to and following the city manager’s submission of his letter of resignation. The public has a right to demand that their elected officials follow the rules and statutes they all took an oath to uphold when they took office. 

I believe that trust matters and respect is the currency of trust. I also believe that my duties, as your elected city councilor, include the sharing of concerns when warranted, and in a timely manner. 

Transparency is a standard you have every right to expect of your government.

Members of the public and members of the Council deserve answers. The manner in which the city manager’s resignation occurred is untimely and unacceptable. I believe we all must continue to ask questions in order to discover exactly what actions were taken, and by whom and why, between the timing of the recent audit report and the abrupt resignation of the city manager earlier this week.

I am unaware of what really happened over the past few days, and I believe it is essential that we understand the reality of how we ended up in the situation we now find ourselves. Namely, we are now without a city manager while beginning the city budget setting process for the upcoming fiscal year.  

There are many reports circulating around the various media speculating what may or may not have occurred. This suggests that either the facts were not provided to the media, or someone, or someones, misreported the facts to purposefully shape the larger narrative for a desired outcome. 

It is apparent the city manager accepted a request to resign from a representative of the whole or (at least as stated in the resignation document), a majority of the council. However, no single city councilor – or mayor – has the authority to ask for a resignation absent a vote of the entire council. In this instance, this never occurred.

I, and to the best of my knowledge many of my fellow councilors, were not aware of what was transpiring during the week prior to the city manager’s resignation. We were following the rules which specify that we do not communicate with one another regarding city matters outside of a public meeting.

I was shocked to hear of the city manager’s resignation. 

I am looking forward to being able to fill in many of the gaps as more facts are brought forward. I urge patience as more information is gathered.

In conclusion, I ask our city and community to remain engaged and participate in the steps ahead of us. I recognize the need for trust-building and truth-telling, and that is precisely why I am sharing my concerns with you in this message. 

Together, I believe we can and will move Salem forward, but it will take all of us working together to be able to achieve that objective.”

     — Brian Hines
 

City Attorney stopped me from asking questions about Stahley’s forced resignation

As a general rule, I've found that when public officials try to stop people from asking valid questions about their organization, this is a sign that something is being covered up. City Attorney Atchison and Mayor Hoy The antidote to secrecy is transparency. That's why I'm sharing the story of how Salem's City Attorney, Dan Atchison, stopped me from asking city councilors a couple of basic questions about the circumstances surrounding the forced resignation of Keith Stahley, the City Manager until February 10. This tale tells itself through a series of email messages. It starts with a message I sent…

City Council approves property tax levy to be voted on in May

It's been a long time coming, but at yesterday's City Council meeting the "livability levy" was approved unanimously, setting up a highly interesting vote by Salem citizens in the May election. A Salem Reporter story by Joe Siess contains some details: Salem city councilors voted unanimously Monday to put a property tax increase before voters in May that, if passed, would help pay for the public library, parks maintenance, and programming at Center 50+.  If voters accept the five-year levy, property taxes would increase by 98 cents per $1,000 of assessed property value, or about $229 annually for the average…

Councilor Nishioka calls Keith Stahley a liar. I’m inclined to believe Stahley.

Today the Salem Reporter has a story about the shifting explanations city officials have been coming up with about the disturbing way Keith Stahley, the recently-resigned City Manager, was removed from his important position. I already knew most of what was said in the story, "A timeline of statements surrounding Salem city manager's resignation." After all, I've begun the process of filing a complaint with the Oregon Government Ethics Commission regarding how Stahley was forced to resign outside of a public process, as detailed in a February 15 blog post, "I just initiated an ethics complaint against the City of…

I just initiated an ethics complaint against the City of Salem

Pressing "send" on an email rarely feels as satisfying to me as it did a few minutes ago when, after laboring on a message to officials at the City of Salem that is required by the Oregon Government Ethics Commission as the first step in filing a complaint regarding a violation of our state's public meeting law, I finally felt satisfied with it. Below is the email that went to various officials at the City of Salem. Some of the formatting is screwed up given that I copied and pasted from my email, which looked fine. Note that what I've…

New info shows forced resignation of Salem City Manager was even more illegal

Before I describe how new information shows that the recent forced resignation of Salem's City Manager, Keith Stahley, was even more illegal than how it appeared a few days ago when I wrote "Salem City Council seems to have acted illegally in forcing City Manager to resign," let's take a step back and consider the broader context here.

The folks at City Hall — Mayor, City Council, city staff — have been trying hard to regain the trust of Salem citizens after the debacle of July 2023 when the City Council voted to impose an employee payroll tax on everybody who works in Salem that would bring more money into the general fund of the city budget, where deficits loomed.

They did this without asking approval of voters, which, not surprisingly, ticked off voters.

After a business-backed coalition gathered enough signatures to put the payroll tax on the November 2023 ballot, it was soundly rejected. The negative fallout continued when Mayor Chris Hoy, who backed the don't-ask-citizens approach to the payroll tax, was soundly defeated by Julie Hoy (no relation) in the May 2024 mayoral election.

Since, City Manager Stahley, other city staff, and the City Council have been diligently working to fashion a proposal to increase revenues that almost certainly will be on the May 2025 ballot, as a special "livability" property tax measure that would fund the library, Center 50+, and parks/recreation only needs final approval by the City Council at an upcoming meeting.

So one would think that the Mayor and city councilors would want to do everything possible to project an aura of calm, considered competency in the run up to voters deciding in a few months whether the City of Salem deserves an additional $14 million a year in property tax revenue.

Well, think again.

Because additional information from City officials and the Salem Reporter shows that what I said in my previous post about Keith Stahley's forced resignation makes what happened look even worse than it originally appeared. I wrote:

It isn't a good look when the Salem City Council does something that reminds me of a recent action by President Trump.

Well, it's actually worse than that, because what the City Council did appears to have been illegal (in the sense of going against the Council Rules), while Trump's action was within the scope of his powers.

What I'm talking about is forcing a senior official to resign because the alternative is being fired. This occurred when Trump made it clear that even though FBI Director Christopher Wray had three years left in his term in office, after Trump was inaugurated he was going to get rid of Wray.

So shortly before Trump took the oath of office, Wray resigned rather than be fired. Pretty much the same thing happened to City Manager Keith Stahley, as I'll describe below — again, the difference being that the City Council seems to have acted illegally in forcing Stahley's resignation, while Trump was just acting like the authoritarian that he aspires to be.

The illegality stems from the fact that only the City Council can hire or fire the City Manager. As noted in my previous post, in his February 9 resignation letter Keith Stahley said:

I am submitting this resignation based on a meeting that I had with Councilor Nishioka on Friday February 7, 2025, where she represented that she was the duly authorized representative of the Mayor and a majority of City Council and requested that I tender my resignation. 

That made it sound like Councilor Linda Nishioka, the City Council president, somehow had spoken with the other seven members of the City Council (which ordinarily has nine members, including the Mayor, but one seat is temporarily vacant) and confirmed that a majority, five or more, wanted Stahley to resign.

However, a decision to either fire the City Manager or ask him to resign can't be made in secret, as happened here.

The City Council met in executive session prior to their February 10 meeting to discuss Stahley's resignation. That happened after Nishioka had told Stahley that a majority of the City Council wanted him to resign. So at first I thought that Nishioka and her fellow councilors had only violated City Council rules and Oregon's public meeting law, as a majority had reached a private decision that Stahley needed to resign.

But a statement issued today by the City of Salem regarding the City Manager's resignation, which I've included as a continuation to this post, includes a timeline that includes this:

  • February 7, 2025.  As Mr. Stahley noted in his resignation letter, Council President Linda Nishioka met with Mr. Stahley and discussed his potential resignation.  Councilor Nishioka met with Mr. Stahley because she believed that Council could conduct a public process leading to Council asking Mr. Stahley for his resignation.  She has stated that she wanted him to avoid the potential embarrassment of that process. Due to public meeting law limitations, Councilor Nishioka was concerned that speaking with other members of Council about this issue would violate the law. She relied on her understanding of the situation after speaking with Mayor Julie Hoy.  This conversation triggered an Executive Session to consider the dismissal or discipline of an employee (ORS 192.660(2)(b)).

Wow. Actually Nishioka hadn't spoken with other members of the City Council about Stahley resigning. So it appears that Nishioka lied when she told Stahley that "she was the duly authorized representative of the Mayor and a majority of City Council" in requesting his resignation. Poor guy. What was Stahley supposed to do when the City Council president tells him that most of the councilors want him gone, so it's either resign or be fired?

Maybe he wouldn't have resigned if he'd known the truth: that Nishioka had only spoken with Mayor Julie Hoy about the resignation. That's two members of the City Council, a long ways from a majority of five out of eight. Joe Siess of the Salem Reporter adds more important details about this outrage in a story today, "Mayor Julie Hoy set in motion events that led to Keith Stahley's abrupt resignation."

An orchestrated effort to remove City Manager Keith Stahley was launched privately by some city leaders at least a full week before the Salem City Council acted to accept his resignation, according to a new statement from city officials and interviews.

Council President Linda Nishioka approached Stahley last week about resigning with the “understanding” from Mayor Julie Hoy that she was acting on behalf of the council, according to a new city statement on the matter issued Thursday, Feb. 13. 

The city had earlier said that Stahley resigned “at city council’s request” but provided no explanation for how councilors agreed to take that action when there had been no public meeting or vote on the matter.

Interviews and the city’s new statement fill in some of the blanks of what happened while raising new questions about actions by the councilors. The city issued the new and unsigned statement a day after Salem Reporter sought records of communications among the mayor and seven councilors regarding Stahley’s resignation.

His abrupt departure comes as Salem city officials plan to ask voters in May to raise property taxes to cover city services. They have said that they need to have the trust of the community for the vote to succeed.

One councilor, Micki Varney, responded to written questions from Salem Reporter on Wednesday, Feb. 12.

Varney said she talked by phone with Hoy on the evening of Sunday, Feb. 2, about the city manager. She said she didn’t commit then to supporting Stahley’s removal.

“I said I needed more information in order to make a decision either way,” Varney said in her email. “I said that we, as a council, needed to collectively discuss what needed to change and then provide that information to Mr. Stahley. I told her that Mr. Stahley needed to decide himself as to whether he could comply with our directives before we as a council could discuss any further action.” 

Councilor Shane Matthews told Salem Reporter that he too had a private conversation with Hoy and the two discussed a recently released performance audit of the city manager’s office. He said he was not asked directly if he would support Stahley’s resignation and he didn’t indicate support for that action. He said Hoy asked him how he felt generally about city leaders and the audit.

Councilors Vanessa Nordyke and Paul Tigan declined to comment. Hoy and Councilors Deanna Gwyn, Irvin Brown, and Nishioka haven’t responded to emailed questions about when they decided the matter of Stahley’s resignation and to whom they communicated that decision.

So nobody on the City Council other than Mayor Hoy and Councilor Nishioka have indicated that they wanted Stahley to resign. Yet Nishioka claimed to represent both Mayor Hoy and a majority on the council in asking for his resignation. 

Oregon Government Ethics Commission

I'm seriously considering filing a complaint with the Oregon Government Ethics Commission.

What Mayor Hoy and Councilor Nishioka did was wrong, and seemingly illegal. Keith Stahley wasn't a perfect City Manager, but he appeared to be a damn good one. He deserved better than to be forced to resign under false pretenses, especially when the scheme cooked up by by Hoy and Nishioka also violated the rules of the City Council and Oregon's public meeting law.

NEXT DAY UPDATE: Today, February 14, the Salem Reporter has another story about the forced resignation of Stahley, "Councilor Micki Varney breaks the silence about city manager's resignation." This is Varney's statement, which reflects her concern about the inappropriate way this debacle was handled:

“I write this feeling great sadness and regret at what has transpired over the past week. It has eroded the trust and transparency we as a Council have been trying to rebuild over the past year.

The public has every right to, and deserves, an explanation of the events leading up to and following the city manager’s submission of his letter of resignation. The public has a right to demand that their elected officials follow the rules and statutes they all took an oath to uphold when they took office. 

I believe that trust matters and respect is the currency of trust. I also believe that my duties, as your elected city councilor, include the sharing of concerns when warranted, and in a timely manner. 

Transparency is a standard you have every right to expect of your government.

Members of the public and members of the Council deserve answers. The manner in which the city manager’s resignation occurred is untimely and unacceptable. I believe we all must continue to ask questions in order to discover exactly what actions were taken, and by whom and why, between the timing of the recent audit report and the abrupt resignation of the city manager earlier this week.

I am unaware of what really happened over the past few days, and I believe it is essential that we understand the reality of how we ended up in the situation we now find ourselves. Namely, we are now without a city manager while beginning the city budget setting process for the upcoming fiscal year.  

There are many reports circulating around the various media speculating what may or may not have occurred. This suggests that either the facts were not provided to the media, or someone, or someones, misreported the facts to purposefully shape the larger narrative for a desired outcome. 

It is apparent the city manager accepted a request to resign from a representative of the whole or (at least as stated in the resignation document), a majority of the council. However, no single city councilor – or mayor – has the authority to ask for a resignation absent a vote of the entire council. In this instance, this never occurred.

I, and to the best of my knowledge many of my fellow councilors, were not aware of what was transpiring during the week prior to the city manager’s resignation. We were following the rules which specify that we do not communicate with one another regarding city matters outside of a public meeting.

I was shocked to hear of the city manager’s resignation. 

I am looking forward to being able to fill in many of the gaps as more facts are brought forward. I urge patience as more information is gathered.

In conclusion, I ask our city and community to remain engaged and participate in the steps ahead of us. I recognize the need for trust-building and truth-telling, and that is precisely why I am sharing my concerns with you in this message. 

Together, I believe we can and will move Salem forward, but it will take all of us working together to be able to achieve that objective.”

Here's the statement from the City of Salem regarding Stahley's resignation. It's good to have this, as it alone provides a solid basis for a complaint with the Oregon Government Ethics Commission.

Salem City Council seems to have acted illegally in forcing City Manager to resign

It isn't a good look when the Salem City Council does something that reminds me of a recent action by President Trump. Well, it's actually worse than that, because what the City Council did appears to have been illegal (in the sense of going against the Council Rules), while Trump's action was within the scope of his powers. What I'm talking about is forcing a senior official to resign because the alternative is being fired. This occurred when Trump made it clear that even though FBI Director Christopher Wray had three years left in his term in office, after Trump…

Upcoming “livability” property tax levy explained at Salem City Club talk

Today Keith Stahley, Salem's City Manager (basically the CEO of city government), gave a presentation to the Salem City Club about the city's budget problems that led to a decision by the City Council to put a "livability" property tax levy on the May 2025 ballot. Livability refers to the Library, Center 50+, and Parks/Recreation -- funding for which will be the focus of the levy. I took photos of almost all of Stahley's slide presentation, missing just a couple of slides. I'll use those slides as the basis for this report on what Stahley said.  Keith Stahley, standing at…

demobrats podcast is a must-listen if you care about Salem politics

I'm not a big fan of podcasts. Until now. Because thanks to a December 31 story by Whitney Woodworth in the Statesman Journal, "Salem politics goes brat: New 'demobrats' podcast focuses on city budget, local government," I learned about the podcast started by Virginia Stapleton and Vik Schaaf. Stapleton is a former Salem city councilor who didn't run for re-election last year, choosing to challenge Kevin Mannix for his seat in the state legislature, House District 21. Unfortunately, she lost to Mannix. Schaff handled social media for Stapleton. The story says that the demobrats color scheme and name is a…

My totally made-up 2024 local and national political awards

It's the last day of 2024. Time to spend a (very) few minutes inspecting the recesses of my brain about what struck me, politically, during the past year, before I turn my attention to a Very Important Question: will CNN be up with Anderson Cooper and Andy Cohen consuming copious amounts of alcohol at Times Square, or will this be a dry year for the only New Year's Eve hosts I can stand to watch? Here's some 2024 awards. Biggest national fuck-up. Joe Biden ignoring his almost-but-not-quite-explicit pledge to only be a one-term president before turning the 2024 Democratic presidential…

Avelo Airlines reduces Salem flights. Only one place to go now: Burbank

Just as skeptics about the newest attempt to bring commercial air service to Salem predicted, in a short time Avelo Airlines has gone from three destinations for outbound flights -- Santa Rosa, Las Vegas, and Burbank -- to only one, Burbank. The best way I've found to describe the recurring fantasy of Salem's Chamber of Commerce and City Council that commercial air service is viable here is an image from the Peanuts comic strip, along with an excerpt from my January 2023 blog post, "City Council approves $2.4 million for airport in dumb move." Here we go again. Monday night…

Thanks to Mayor Hoy and three others who are leaving the Salem City Council

Tonight is the last Salem City Council meeting for the year. So this is a goodbye of sorts for four members of the council who won't be returning after their terms end on December 31, either because they lost a re-election bid or chose not to run again. Mayor Chris Hoy (lost reelection bid) Ward 1 Councilor Virginia Stapleton (chose not to run again)Ward 3 Councilor Trevor Phillips (chose not to run again) Ward 5 Councilor Jose Gonzalez (chose not to run again) I've adapted a "thanks for running" blog post from 2016 and 2020 for this occasion, because it…

Mayor-elect Julie Hoy faces censure over City Council vote involving campaign donor

It's another battle of Hoy vs. Hoy. Chris Hoy, Salem's current mayor, lost the first battle with his unrelated namesake when he was soundly defeated by City Councilor Julie Hoy in the May primary election that decided the race because she got more than 50% of the votes, so a rematch in the November general election wasn't necessary. Julie Hoy and Chris Hoy Depending on your point of view, the second Hoy vs. Hoy battle either is a sour grapes attempt by Chris Hoy to get back at Julie Hoy for snatching the mayor position out of his hands, or…

Poll shows Salem residents oppose higher property taxes for city services

Not at all what Salem's city officials were hoping for when they commissioned a survey to learn the degree of support for two possible proposals aimed at increasing property tax revenue to fund city services.  A Salem Reporter story lays out the main survey findings. Here's how "In poll, Salem residents say they won't pay more property taxes for public safety, library or parks" starts out.  Salem voters won’t pay more in property taxes to avoid deep cuts to the city’s library, parks or emergency services.That’s according to a new poll commissioned by the city of Salem, which targeted over…

Looks like paid parking is coming to downtown Salem. Bad idea?

Downtown parking here in Salem used to be free and unlimited, if my memory serves me correctly. Then parking was still free, but limited in hours -- currently three.  In 2013, when downtown parking was free with a two hour limit, city officials planned to install parking meters. That idea was met with strong resistance from downtown businesses and led to a petition drive spearheaded by downtown resident and business owner Carole Smith aimed at stopping paid parking. The City Council ended up implementing the initiative language rather than let it go to a vote of the people. That allowed…

Salem City Council facing tough choices on revenue-raising options

It wouldn't be surprising if Mayor Hoy and the other members of the Salem City Council have a bit of post-traumatic stress as they get serious at next Monday's council meeting about choosing an option to raise revenue for city services, which are heading for a $15 million shortfall in the next fiscal year, which begins July 1, 2025.  That figure is in an informative Salem Reporter story, "Library advocates push for property tax increase to restore Salem library hours." Local library advocates organizing through the group Fund Our Libraries Now are asking the Salem City Council to seek voter…

Here’s a great message from Trevor Phillips, departing Ward 3 city councilor

Trevor Phillips, the Ward 3 Salem City Councilor, didn't run for re-election this year. Instead, he endorsed Nathan Soltz, a fellow progressive, who narrowly lost to Shane Matthews in the May election. On June 20 Phillips posted a message on Facebook about Matthews' win and a look back at what Phillips was proud of accomplishing during his time on the City Council, and what he regretted: the decision to impose a employee payroll tax on Salem workers to meet a budget shortfall.  I liked the message a lot. Honest. Nicely written. Substantive. You'll be missed on the City Council, Trevor.…