Summer is prime time for building projects, and housing is a priority for many communities. The Oregon Legislature has adopted legislation in recent years in efforts to offer cities tools for increasing housing production. One of those tools is urban growth boundary expansion, under certain criteria. This article explains steps necessary to seek this one-time option.
What is an employer to do when an employee seemingly resigns, or makes ambiguous statements about no longer wanting to stay at their current job? What is an employer to do if an employee does not immediately make a need for accommodations known to their employer? This article outlines best practices for effective communication and strategies to help support positive employee relations.
By Truman Stone
Your board or council just passed a motion. You realize you missed an important step or that important information was not discussed before the vote. Do you know what to do?
A motion and second are made, but you want more information or time to think about the topic before voting. What to do?
A member keeps raising points of order, grinding discussion to a halt and making meetings much longer than necessary. What to do?
In each of the above scenarios, you may wonder whether your governing body should have a designated parliamentarian or receive special training in parliamentary procedure. You also may fear that you must strictly follow the tome that is Robert’s Rules. Never fear – we are here to help!
First, a confession. Law schools generally do not teach parliamentary procedure. Your high school Future Farmers of America (FFA) holds Parli Pro, a competitive leadership development event, and you may be better off asking a kid with a blue jacket. However, most attorneys who represent boards or committee clients are forced to learn parliamentary procedure on the job to help clients run their meetings efficiently. Although not registered parliamentarians, we have gained good working knowledge.
Henry Martyn Robert was an Army officer who first published the Pocket Manual of Rules of Order for Deliberative Assemblies in 1876. The official volume of Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised [RONR] is on its twelfth edition. The full parliamentary manual is intended and best suited for large assemblies like the congress or the legislature. Within Robert’s Rules there is a distinction made for small bodies. [RONR Sect. 49:21.]
Are we bound to Robert’s Rules? Generally, no. I find no statute that specifically requires Robert’s Rules. The League of Oregon Cities (LOC) Model Charter simply states that “[t]he council must by resolution adopt rules to govern its meetings.” Unless your Charter or principle act specifically designates Robert’s Rules, you are free to adopt alternate or abbreviated rules – and there are alternates available. Check to see if your government has formally adopted parliamentary rules and what version has been adopted. Once your government has formally designated or adopted rules, you become obligated to follow those rules.
Some general things to consider:
• Designate a parliamentarian and get that person some training. Consider the board secretary, city recorder, or similar staff member for this role.
• Have a copy of Robert’s Rules available. Robert’s Rules of Order, In Brief, is a simplified version that I recommend. Rather than guess or struggle, adjourn the meeting for some quick research.
• If you are unsure what to do, make a parliamentary inquiry to the chair and discuss how to proceed.
• Review your council or body’s rules on an annual basis. Keep what works and change what does not.
• The people you represent expect efficient meetings conducted civilly. Don’t get bogged down in the minutia of procedure.
Now, to answer the questions above. If you get stuck and no one knows what to do, make the following motion: “I move to suspend the rules to do _________ or to accomplish __________.” This motion requires a second and a vote of two-thirds of the members. [RONR Sect. 25:1-20.] You must still vote on decisions as required by Oregon Public Meetings Law, but getting to that vote will be easier. Once you get yourself unstuck, regular order resumes.
If you anticipate a problem for an upcoming meeting, call one of our attorneys. Alternatively, find a Future Farmers of America chapter and give a kid a job at your meetings.
By Mark Wolf
Food, Beverages and Swag provided to Public Officials
House Bill (HB) 4161 now clarifies that a public body may provide food and beverages to its public officials during meetings or other official events.
Why the change? Oregon’s ethics laws prohibit public officials from using their office to obtain a financial benefit that would not otherwise be available to them. In May of 2025, the Oregon Government Ethics Commission (OGEC) concluded that a public body providing food and/or beverages to its elected officials and staff could constitute an impermissible “financial gain” under ORS 244.040, unless the food and beverages are (1) part of the public officials “official compensation;” or (2) offered to members of the public.
What does the bill do?
HB 4161 now exempts the following actions from the ORS 244.040 prohibition on using one’s office for personal financial gain or to avoid financial harm:
“Food, beverages or both provided to a public official by a public body during meetings or other official events held by the public body or as otherwise required to be provided by law or rule of this state.” ORS 244.040(2)(j).”
And:
“Merchandise provided to a public official by a public body if the cost of the merchandise does not exceed $100 in a calendar year, except as otherwise provided by policy of the public body.” ORS 244.040(2)(k).”
So, local governments can now safely provide meals to their boards, councils, and commissions, as well as to their employees and volunteers during council or board meetings, trainings, and other official meetings.
In addition, local governments may also provide merchandise, such as branded clothing, hats, drinkware, and other recognition items so long as the total cost does not exceed $100 per year for each public official. The statute also allows local governments to choose a cap of less than the $100, or to allow none at all.
A Governor’s Veto
House Bill (HB) 4177 was vetoed by Governor Kotek. It was meant to provide clarity on what constitutes “deliberation” under Oregon’s Public Meetings Laws to help prevent public officials from inadvertently engaging in serial communications in violation of Oregon’s open meeting laws. Specifically, the definition of “deliberation” would have changed from “discussion or communication that is part of a decision-making process” to “discussion or communication in which the members of a governing body examine, weigh or reflect upon the reasons for or against a decision that is subject to the jurisdiction of the governing body.” The change would have required a quorum’s discussion to have more meaning or purpose for or against a decision for it to rise to the level of “deliberation.”
HB 4177 would have also expanded the list of communications that do not apply to Oregon’s Public Meetings Law. Those communications that would have been statutorily allowed were those that:
Governor Kotek vetoed this bill on April 16, 2026, citing “concerns that some of the new language could be utilized to circumvent transparency.” She urged the OGEC to work with the legislature, her office and key stakeholders to provide more clarity between now and the next legislative session in 2027.
