Chenoweth’s fellow Mac city councilors express support for hiring process, city manager
McMinnville City Councilor Chris Chenoweth has publicly questioned city leadership over the hiring process of the future police chief and other executive positions, but a majority of council disagrees.
The councilors told the News-Register that City Manager Jeff Towery is following a process that has been in place for years.
The city is hoping to name a replacement for retiring Chief Matt Scales by Nov. 1, and Towery has led the search along with an interview panel of employees. The city held a meet-and-greet with finalists earlier this month that all councilors were invited to attend.
Chenoweth criticized the hiring process for the police chief, city attorney and public works director during public comment at Tuesday’s meeting, saying city council should have more of a role in the interviewing process rather than a yes or no vote on a candidate recommended by Towery.
He alleged the city is violating its charter with the current process and asked for an outside attorney to be brought in to determine if Towery overstepped his role as city manager.
Chenoweth stepped down from the dais to address fellow councilors as a citizen during public comment, an unusual move and — per city policy — no one responded at the time to Chenoweth’s assertions.
The News Register asked all seven councilors their thoughts on the assertions and four said they believed the city is following the correct process, Chenoweth disagreed and Councilors Jessica Payne and Sal Peralta did not respond to the request.
Drabkin pointed to the charter, which says council “may designate an appointive officer to supervise” the hiring process.
“Council has a practice of appointing based on recommendations from the designated supervisor of the city employees (a.k.a. the city manager),” Drabkin said. “Current city legal counsel and previous legal counsel have all interpreted this practice to be in line with the charter.
“The city attorney recognized there is flexibility in how the council interprets the language and the current process is completely within the charter.”
Council President Adam Garvin had a similar view, stating current and previous city attorneys interpreted the charter in the same way. He questioned why Chenoweth has pointed to rules in other cities’ charters when making the argument McMinnville is violating theirs.
“Councilor Chenoweth stretches to try and cite the City of Beaverton’s charter to make his case for violation of the City of McMinnville charter (which) has no merit,” Garvin said. “Each City charter is independent of one another, how or why Beaverton’s charter is in his argument is unclear for me.
“I wouldn’t go to Target and try to cite Costco’s return policy on a similar item, nor would I buy a GMC Truck and expect a OEM Ram Truck powertrain warranty.”
In a letter submitted to the city, Chenoweth cited the Beaverton charter’s definition of the term “appoint” in regard to hiring.
Councilors Zack Geary and Kellie Menke agreed the process is legal, with Menke saying she has seen many processes for hiring chiefs over the years.
Chenoweth said that while he believes the city is violating the charter, the council should bear some responsibility for not calling out the process when it was first used to hire the city attorney.
“The first time this process was used, we should have addressed it and put it back in our hands,” he said.
Asked whether Towery has overstepped his role as city manager, councilors supported the city’s top executive and noted city staff have frequently updated the dais since Scales announced his retirement plans in February.
“On July 9, council was invited to a scheduled police chief candidate meet-and-greet to be held in early October. At that opportunity were councilors, police department staff, members of the city’s (Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Advisory Committee), and other city executives,” Geary said. “All that wanted to were able to provide feedback after that on the prospective chief candidates. All that will lead to a recommendation to council to make the appointment of a new chief, assuming a final rigorous background and evaluation check is passed.”
Garvin agreed Human Resources Director Vickie Hedges has been in frequent contact with council and Chenoweth had plenty of time to cite concerns ahead of the final decision.
“Matt’s retirement was noticed over eight months ago, the timeline for filling this vacancy was made aware to all of council over five months ago. Councilor Chenoweth suddenly has an issue with “the process,” less than 30 days ago,” Garvin said.
An email exchange between Chenoweth and City Attorney David Ligtenberg about the charter rules occurred between Sept. 24 and 27, with Ligtenberg explaining the position he has held publicly since.
Drabkin pointed again to the charter where it states the city manager is responsible for oversight of all employees outside of the Municipal Judge and Mac Water & Light employees.
“I do feel Councilor Chenoweth has overstepped his role in this process,” she said.
Chenoweth denied asking for an investigation into Towery and said an outside attorney could provide perspective they may not receive from city employees.
“Since there is disagreement as to the meaning of the charter, I want an outside attorney to establish the meaning and thus establish whether Jeff has exceeded his authority under the charter,” Chenoweth said. “The Council needs to actually hire the attorney separate from the executive branch so that the current attorney’s bias potential is not a factor and, more importantly, so he is protected from any potential consequences of a determination.”
Council receives “sound legal advice” from Ligtenberg and bringing in outside counsel would be a waste, according to Geary.
“The call for hiring outside review would be a wasted expense by a rogue councilor trying to prove an outcome they want,” he said.
Also on Tuesday, Chenoweth accused Drabkin and Towery of centralizing control “to the point where open discussions on these types of issues are being stifled.”
Drabkin disagreed with that assessment.
“It’s up to council to bring me agenda items for consideration,” she said. “I’ve never received a request to have this as an agenda item. Chenoweth’s first email to me about this was on Oct. 11 expressing his discontent with the process but without a request to be discussed on the dais.”
Garvin said prior city attorney vacancies slowed processes down but councilors have always had the opportunity to discuss topics that have passed legal review. Geary was more direct.
“Any effective councilor knows how to bring up and address topics,” Geary said.
Chenoweth cited the safe school zones debate from earlier this year, past disagreements with Mac Water & Light and the police chief search as examples when topics were not able to be discussed at the dais.
Towery declined to comment for this article.
Comments
B
I would encourage everyone to read the city's charter. Mr. Chenoweth is correct. The City Manager supervises the chief but it's up to council to approve. Just because it's been done another way in the past does not make it right. I mentioned in an earlier post that I wondered why no one with a law enforcement background was involved in the selection process. Still wondering.
mikes
B. Thank you. I read the Charter. Yep. The Council approves but it says nothing about the actual hiring process. The Manager is the supervisor. No where does it talk about who does all the recruiting investigating, and coordination it takes to hire. Who on the Council is up for that? It seems reasonable the Manager who's job involves that kind of work might be who pulls the hiring process together for the Council approve. That, of course, when there is not an election time to make it an issue.
BC
I'm sure the NR did their investigative reporting and actually checked into the charter rules before writing such a condemning article about Councilor Chenoweth...right?
BC
For example, Section 11 of the McMinnville City Charter states (CAPS Emphasis mine):
Section 11. Appointed Administrative Officers. Additional
officers of the city shall be a municipal judge, a city recorder, a
city manager, a city attorney, a director of public works, a chief of
police, a fire chief, a treasurer, and such other officers as the
council deems necessary. EACH OF THESE OFFICERS SHALL BE APPOINTED AND MAY BE RENEWED BY A MAJORITY OF THE COUNCIL. The council may
designate any appointive officer to SUPERVISE any other appointive
officer except the municipal judge in the exercise of his judicial
functions. (Res. No. 1978-47 §3(a)).
I'm not an attorney, so maybe I'm reading it wrong. Seems to me that the council is supposed to appoint, by a majority, the above listed positions. The City Attorney has the power to SUPERVISE the appointees. (I don't see where the City Attorney has the power to "appoint", only "supervise" after they've been appointed).
Again, I'm not an attorney, so maybe I'm missing something or not reading it correctly.
I can certainly see Councilor Chenoweth's point though.
mikes
BC. The hiring process is an administrative function, at least in my experience. The Council still Appoints... that is the hiring decision. As I understand it Council will hire or not hire who is before them. Nothing in Section 11 (your CAPs) refers to how the hiring process is handled. Not sure what it is the problem. The Council selects and appoints after all of the administrative background and investigative work is done. Having the volunteer Council members spend their time interview applicants is what is wanted. The Charter does not in any way address that process.
BC
mikes,
I can see that as an interpretation, but is that the original intent of the Charter rule? It sounds more like a loophole to me.
In my business, I, personally, hired my department heads. I interviewed, I did the research, I did the hiring process.
Once my department heads are hired, I then trusted them to hire their own supervisors and staff, unless and until there is an issue involving the department head where I need to step in.
The department head in this case is the Police Chief and the boss is the City Council. I don't believe any of the council should have to give a nod to a department head based on a meet and greet, while not being privy to the background information or process of narrowing down to the final candidates.
This is how I believe the intent of the Charter was written. Not to give another appointed individual the power to hire a department head on their own, or with a committee of other appointed members, but to retain the power at the "boss" level to hire the top person.
I think the way to clear this up, if it even needs to be at this forgone point, is to ask the founding members of the Charter for their original intent. Barring that, I can see where an independent review of the Charter rules is a reasonable request.
Stating that it will cost the city too much money for an independent legal opinion is a little disingenuous given how much money the city is paying monthly (far longer than anticipated) for interest only payments on the RB Rubber site. Not to mention surveys, consultants, and other huge expenses we seem to be paying.
madmacs
Given the timing of this and the failure of Chenoweth to bring this up over the course of eight months with ample opportunity (in addition to being the sole council member questioning this process), Chenoweth's motivation in doing this seems suspect. It looks a lot like a ham-fisted attempt at some sort of October surprise to me.
Chris Chenoweth
@Madmacs
The Council was not informed of the process. Yes, we knew 8 months ago that our chief was retiring effective the end of the year. The City Manager informed us of is intent to fill it so that the new chief would begin on the first of the year. I told him then that the timing was bad and would unnecessarily subject the process to politics as a result. My fears have been realized. I only learned what the process was due to a question posed to the City Manager at the meet & greet which occurred on the 11th of October. It was then that I emailed all required parties of my request to have an outside attorney evaluate whether the city manager exceeded his authority under the charter. *Crickets*
This is an executive branch versus legislative branch issue. Our charter seems clear to me that the Council (the legislative branch) is the only ones with the authority to appoint. Had the charter intended to share this be a shared power with the Executive Baranch I believe it would have included the word "appoint" in the powers given to the City Manager. Further if the charter gives this authority to the City Manager why was an Ordinance needed in 1995 that added a City Manager recommendation to the process?
“2.13.030Chief of police – Position created/appointment.
There is created the position of chief of police pursuant to Chapter III, Section II of the McMinnville city charter and such chief of police shall be appointed by a majority of the council with recommendation from the city manager. (Ord. 4597 §1 (part), 1995).”
This only gives the City Manager the authority to make a recommendation, not control the entire process to the point that the Council only gets an up or down vote at the end.
This process is identical to multiple previous department head appointments. Please read the Resolution that the City Council passed here:
https://www.mcminnvilleoregon.gov/sites/default/files/fileattachments/ordinance/24992/res_2024-12.pdf
1 of 2
Chris Chenoweth
@Madmacs
The Council was not informed of the process. Yes, we knew 8 months ago that our chief was retiring effective the end of the year. The City Manager informed us of is intent to fill it so that the new chief would begin on the first of the year. I told him then that the timing was bad and would unnecessarily subject the process to politics as a result. My fears have been realized. I only learned what the process was due to a question posed to the City Manager at the meet & greet which occurred on the 11th of October. It was then that I emailed all required parties of my request to have an outside attorney evaluate whether the city manager exceeded his authority under the charter. *Crickets*
This is an executive branch versus legislative branch issue. Our charter seems clear to me that the Council (the legislative branch) is the only ones with the authority to appoint. Had the charter intended to share this be a shared power with the Executive Baranch I believe it would have included the word "appoint" in the powers given to the City Manager. Further if the charter gives this authority to the City Manager why was an Ordinance needed in 1995 that added a City Manager recommendation to the process?
“2.13.030Chief of police – Position created/appointment.
There is created the position of chief of police pursuant to Chapter III, Section II of the McMinnville city charter and such chief of police shall be appointed by a majority of the council with recommendation from the city manager. (Ord. 4597 §1 (part), 1995).”
This only gives the City Manager the authority to make a recommendation, not control the entire process to the point that the Council only gets an up or down vote at the end.
This process is identical to multiple previous department head appointments. Please read the Resolution that the City Council passed here:
https://www.mcminnvilleoregon.gov/sites/default/files/fileattachments/ordinance/24992/res_2024-12.pdf
1 of 2
Chris Chenoweth
Notice in the whereas statements who is making the appointment? Can you appoint someone AFTER they have already been appointed? Notice the City Manager appointed the City Attorney some 5 and ½ months prior to this vote on March 12, 2024 and the Public Works Director some 3 weeks prior. How is the Council appointing if the subjects of the appointment are already appointed and apparently on the payroll?
As to the October surprise. I did not set this timing; I did not attempt to move authority delegated to one branch over to another. I am just the messenger who is willing to stand up and be counted for what is right. I made my case in the court of public opinion. I have been unable to really make my case in front of the Council because of the mayor's jealous control of the agenda.
After the election we will vote on the new chief. I will make my case again then. Hopefully I will be able to convince my fellow Councilors of the need to maintain the power boundaries of the charter. Abdicating our responsibilities under the Charter should never be an option.
Let me give you two real good reasons for separating these roles.
1) Any process undertaken by the Council must be done in public with public scrutiny. As you can see by the lack of knowledge that I, as a Councilor had regarding the process, the city is not required to be as transparent. Department heads should be a transparent hiring process to the community. At the very least the process of how a decision will be reached should be created in an environment where the public may give comment and have time to weigh in.
2) If any department head hiring goes south the citizens should have a way to hold accountable those responsible. The citizens have no direct way to hold a city manager accountable, but they do have a direct way to hold the Council accountable. Since we will be held accountable, the decision-making process, and not just a rubber stamp at the end, should be in our hands.
2 of 2
madmacs
Chris, you had the ability to request this be on the agenda for the council to discuss, but failed to do so. As Councilor Geary said, "Nay effective councilor knows how to bring up and address topics"
Given the way you are going about this it looks more like grandstanding and an attempt to inject controversy into a process that has been followed for years. Given that, the fact that you are doing this weeks before an election it looks like an attempt to smear the opponent of someone you openly support in the upcoming election.
Your explanations for some of this are disingenuous at best given the facts stated by others on the council.
Don Dix
Councilor Chris Chenowith is being candid, like it or not. We could use some of that at other levels of city government, wouldn't you say?
Chris Chenoweth
@MadMacs
The "truth" is I asked BOTH the Mayor and the Council President to put it on the agenda. I only went public after it became clear they were not going to do so.
The reason I am responding to you is to address misconceptions people have about what happened and why. I appreciate your criticisms and take them to heart, but I assure you there is nothing disingenuous about my position. This was done wrong. It cut out the Council and by extension the public and this process needs to be corrected going forward. I will continue this when we vote and hopefully get it fixed before we hire the Finance Director.
BC
"Any effective councilor knows how to bring up and address topics" Quote from Councilor Geary in the NR.
That might be true behind the scenes, where the public isn't privy to what goes on. What isn't true is that just because it's brought up, it's put on the agenda. Nice piece of misdirection Councilor Geary.
It took months for the Safe School Zones to be put on the agenda because Mayor Drabkin refused to do so. It was a huge topic of discussion for the better part of a year by the citizens of McMinnville. Many spoke about the issue in their three minute allotment, most of whom were argued with by Drabkin, or told they didn't know what was happening behind the scenes. Councilors aren't supposed to interact during the public comment period. Mayor Drabkin made a habit of interacting with people giving testimony she didn't agree with (including our school superintendent). Look at the videos of City Council meetings for the past year to see for yourself. Drabkin continuously abused her position by justifying her inactions during public testimony time.
She did not put Safe School Zones on the agenda despite months of being asked to.
Councilor Chenoweth has stated that he asked to have this hiring issue put on the agenda. He was ignored by the Mayor, who was the only person who had the power to put it on the agenda. Passing it off to legal council seems like a good way to avoid being held accountable for inaction despite being directly asked.
The only recourse left to Councilor Chenoweth was to make a public comment, where it then became public record.
Whether this course of hiring is appropriate or not, will be determined by the people who should be discussing it; the City Council Members. Now that it's finally come to light and is part of the public record, maybe that can happen.
Or maybe we can elect a new Mayor who IS transparent and listens to her council members and citizens. All of them.
CubFan
BC... well stated... completely agree!
Chris Chenoweth is one of the most honest people I know. He has grounded principles and is not willing to deviate from those. He takes his job as a councilor seriously, and it's part of the fabric of his very being to follow the law. Nothing short of that. And he's the ONLY city councilor who steps up to advocate for his ultimate boss... citizens. I'm very grateful for his hard work and ethics.
And yes, Don Dix, wouldn't it be refreshing if we saw more of this in government?
sbagwell
In her letter, Sidonie Winfield suggests the controversy has actually arisen over prospective policing approach rather than the hiring process.
Based on comments by Morris at the recent candidate forum, she writes:
Other answers helped clarify the recent histrionics over the process of hiring a new police chief.
"A chief who recognizes the law and works within it is a priority of the city. A chief who stretches the law to criminalize poverty, homelessness, addiction and mental illness stretches police and jail budgets while putting us at risk for litigation. Criminalizing everything is a short-term solution that puts the city at risk."
That might explain a lot of things.
Steve
Drew
Chris Chenoweth is the ONLY council member who has the guts to stand up against this non-transparent and deceptive city council and mayor! I pray tomorrow will bring the much needed change our city desperately needs!
CubFan
Right on Drew! It's a blessing to have him advocate for citizens!
B
Regardless of one's interpretation of the charter or how hiring has occurred in the past, wouldn't one think that choosing the right person for a position as important as police chief involve more than a City Manager and his hand selected team?
tagup
Not really…. The city manager and the HR dept should be more familiar with the duties & responsibilities for the position. I believe that the chief will report to the city manager…. Not directly to the council.