The Nugget Newspaper - News and Opinion from Sisters, Oregon

It's a question that arises frequently in Sisters: Why not open up city council eligibility to allow at least one councilor from outside the city limits?

The idea is attractive for a couple of reasons: It would allow the city to tap the talents and public-spiritedness of the multitude of capable folks who live in the country surrounding Sisters. And it would give "outsiders" - who are deeply invested in Sisters emotionally and financially - a little more say in decisions that affect them.

As attractive as the idea may seem, it's not going to happen. The legal obstacles are too steep - indeed, probably insurmountable.

The charter of the City of Sisters defines who is eligible to be a city councilor:

Section 7. COUNCIL. The council shall be composed of five councilors elected from the city at large...

Section 12. QUALIFICATIONS OF OFFICERS. No person shall be eligible for an elective office of the city unless he or she resides in the city limits and is a qualified elector within the meaning of the state constitution and has resided in the city during the twelve months immediately preceding the election.

City charters can be amended - but even if citizens agreed to change the charter to allow an "outside" member of council, it probably wouldn't pass muster at the state level.

City attorney Steve Bryant explained the legal ramifications to The Nugget:

"Beyond the charter issues, Oregon law states that: 221.110 City officers; eligibility. The officers of a city created under ORS 221.010 shall be five councilors, a municipal judge and such other officers as the council deems necessary. Any resident of a city shall be eligible to hold an office of the city.

"The statute identifies the only qualified people to be a council member; that is city residents," Bryant said. "State law does not allow for individuals who are not city residents/city electors to be a council member. The City, via its charter, can make the qualifications somewhat more restrictive than the statute, but not less restrictive."

But notice that the statute says that "any resident of a city shall be eligible to hold an office of the city" - it doesn't say outright that "outsiders" can't. So "State law does not allow for individuals who are not city residents/city electors to be a council member," - but it doesn't expressly forbid it, right? Maybe some wiggle room there?

It would require some very generous interpretation of the statute - but for the sake of argument, let's say "maybe." There's another obstacle.

Sean O'Day, general counsel for the League of Oregon Cities, raises an issue that also works against the notion.

As a "Home Rule" state, the Oregon legislature has little say as to how a city chooses to structure itself, O'Day says. So a city might attempt to do something like allowing for the election of an "outside" city councilor.

"We don't have a Home Rule issue there," O'Day said. "You might have another constitutional issue."

That issue comes down to a variation on the classic American concern: Taxation without representation.

An "outside" councilor would certainly be voting on issues that would impose taxes or costs on city residents - costs that that "outsider" would not pay.

"The residents of that community (inside the city limits) might have some kind of legal issue" with that, O'Day said.

That issue would be resolved in the courts through a lawsuit.

"It's certainly an interesting legal question," O'Day said. "I don't know what that case would look like - what that outcome would look like."

So, if city citizens changed the City charter and even if the statutory language Bryant identified could be worked around, the election of an "outside" councilor would be fraught with legal implications.

Given the legal obstacles, whether it's a good idea or not, the structure of City Council is not going to change any time soon.