Commissioners At Odds On Commission Appointment Process

The County announced on February 2nd that there were 23 who submitted applications for the open county commission position 2 vacancy. At the board of commissioners regular meeting on February 4^th County Counsel Kristin Yuille reported that Wednesday the 4th was the deadline for both commissioners to submit a list of their selections by 5pm and that they could select up to 10 to be reviewed. She said once those selections are in, staff will look and see if there's any matches between the two commissioners, and those individuals would move forward, probably at a special meeting or a work session, and possibly interviews if the timeline allows. Yuille also claimed the "vacancy must be filled by appointment within 30 days, that's by statute." Yuille previously cited Oregon Revised Statute 236.210(2), which does not have a deadline.

Commissioner Casey Miller said he did not agree to the process, and would not be providing his recommendations by the end of the day. Miller said he did not agree to the timeline and wanted a more transparent process. “We need to have a process that is fair and equitable and certainly so the community can participate. I just want you to be aware that I will not be providing 10 applications at the end of the day today, that is not something that we agreed to do.” Yuille and Commissioner Walter Chuck both said that Miller agreed with the established timeline for appointing a commissioner at the work session in January, which Miller disputed, saying he only agreed to accepting applications.

Commissioner Miller said he asked for there to be continued conversation on the process, and that it be more transparent and public. He suggested a model that is used by Clackamas County as an example. Miller pointed out that he asked for this to be discussed at the January 21 meeting, which was cancelled after staff said there was insufficient business on the agenda, a characterization Miller disputed. When asked if Commissioner Chuck cancelled the January 21 meeting he said no. Miller also requested a special meeting to be held on January 28^th to further discussions, he said received no response and the meeting was not scheduled. During the January 14 work session, Miller repeated asked to present his proposed framework for the vacancy process, but Chuck denied his requests.

Commissioner Miller said he emailed Commissioner Chuck with a proposed timeline and motion.  Chuck said since Miller made the proposal through email he was not comfortable discussing it and noted that he would be submitting his top recommendations to staff by 5pm February 4^th. Miller told him he wanted to establish a meeting to go over the recommended top picks together and asked to establish a date to do that, which was denied. It is unknown if there will be a public interview process or what the next steps will be. According to Miller the only aspect of the commissioner vacancy process that has received general agreement by the Board has been the acceptance of applications for the vacant position.

Beyond accepting applications Commissioner Miller said the board has not provided formal direction to staff regarding the steps, timeline, evaluation criteria, or public process for filling the vacancy - these have not been adopted through Board action. Commissioner Chuck stated legal counsel is researching the next steps. This is the process discussed at the work session Chuck said the same one that was used to fill Commissioner Kaety Jacobson's position. The 23 applicants' submissions can be viewed on Commissioner Miller’s website.