To the Editor:

We are writing to advocate for fair and open elections in John Day for the next mayor.

Unfortunately, John Day’s municipal charter is outdated and overly vague about council procedures for appointing vacant positions. What is clear is the legislative intent of the charter, which is to give voters the ultimate choice about who represents them on the city council.

Some councilors have indicated they intend to appoint the mayor’s replacement. If they do, more councilors will be appointed to their seats than elected, and we will no longer have a democratically elected government.

The council has options, but so do the voters. If the city council chooses to appoint, it will go against the people’s will. We voted to recall the last mayor, and we should get to vote to choose our next one.

The council can submit an advisory question to the voters. An advisory question is a non-binding and non-legislative measure that cities can use to seek guidance from voters on a particular topic. They can submit the names of their applicants for the mayor position to the voters as an advisory question and then appoint the applicant who receives the most recommendations.

This approach is similar to a special election (which the council can also do under its charter) but still gives the council the ultimate authority on whom to appoint, armed with an objective opinion from their constituents collected through the ballot process.

We urge the council to follow the charter’s principles and let us choose our next mayor. The cost of one ballot question will be far less than that of four more recalls.

Vernon Morris

John Day