At-Large:  Nathan H. Smith

Your Top Three Priorities

1.Examine mayoral powers and term of office.
2.Examine method of selection/election of Mayor.
3.Examine School Committee Council relationship.

Please list prior applicable experience:

2 Council terms: 1 at-large; 1 District; Served as Mayor 2003-2004; Attorney at Bernstein Shur 26 years; Co-Chair or Chaired numerous task forces addressing community issues including: Sustainable Portland, Bayside, Affordable Housing, Athletic Fields; Homelessness; Community Needs Assessments, etc; leadership roles in Community Orgs. including: United Way President; Portland Trails Co-Founder & President; Public Library Vice President (current).

What do you hope to accomplish as part of the commission?

Take a thoughtful open-minded look at whether or not the current structure of City Government best serves its citizens or whether some modification should be presented for voter consideration.

What do you see as issues within the current structure of city government?

See Priorities above. There may be others I haven’t thought of.

What are you thoughts on the 1986 charter report? What prior issues would be the most helpful for the current Commission to consider?

I think they did a good job. With the benefit of 23 years hindsight I believe a closer look at the executive function of Portland government is now in order.

What other city charters have you examined? How would it inform your approach to analyzing our city’s charter?

I have looked at Westbrook, Lewiston, Sioux Falls SD and Topeka KS. I’ve learned two things so far. There are many different ways to structure mayoral power within a City government and some of them might be worth considering for Portland and if the Charter Commission is going to take on the so-called “Elected Mayor” issue it needs to look hard for some best practices nationally.

Would you support an elected mayor? If no, why not?

Maybe. I approach the issue with an open mind. There are so many different ways to “elect” a mayor. For example, if we just elected our mayor at large but changed nothing else, not much would change. “Elected Mayor” is code for more power, longer terms, more direct say by voters, a different answer to the “who’s in charge” question.

What parts of the current city charter do you feel are antiquated?

I think the 1986 Commission did a good job updating the Charter. The issue is not so much being “antiquated” but rather policy questions.

Would you consider re-districting the City of Portland? Why and how?

I’ll consider almost anything. I’ve yet to hear a strong argument for doing so.

Would you modify the current relationship between the school committee and city council?

Maybe. It’s fair game for a re-examination. Whether there’s a better way to structure the relationship remains to be seen.

What role do you think the charter commission should play to educate the public on changes made to the city charter?

A huge role. Ideas, good or not, are only of value if informed by public input and tested in the crucible of an approval referendum. Commission members will have put in a lot of time becoming conversant with some complicated issues, they will need to build consensus and share that assimilated knowledge if there are to be any changes.

What role is the charter commission for public engagement during the process of re-examining the charter?

There should be several public forums early in the process and some later in the process when the Commission develops recommendations. There should be opportunities for written comment from the public and meetings should be open to the public.

What else would you like to add?

Commission members need to be thoughtful, open minded, capable of building consensus, good listeners and prepared to learn from the public and the experience of other cities.