Decisions/2025-310
Ordinance2025-310

Should Portland amend Small Donor Elections Code to adopt the recommendations of the Portland Elections Commission (amend Code Chapter 2.16)?

As recommended by the Portland Elections Commission, this ordinance aligns city election cycle timelines with new state timelines, aligns the match cap for the Auditor’s election with the amount needed to mount a competitive bid for that office, ensures penalties are paid in accordance with administrative rules, permits campaigns to collect allowable contributions prior to filing notice, and delegates to the Portland Elections Commission whether to except contributions from candidates from certification threshold requirements and to find a way to enable candidates who ran for a different office to participate in Small Donor Elections without penalty if they later run for city office in the same election cycle.

Official impact statement
See the official legal title

Amend Small Donor Elections Code to adopt the recommendations of the Portland Elections Commission (amend Code Chapter 2.16)

Next appearanceFinal action is posted; watch for implementation updates.
Follow this matter
01 · Understand it

What this proposal would actually do.

Plain-language orientation first. Every substantive statement below links to its official basis.

What would change

As recommended by the Portland Elections Commission, this ordinance aligns city election cycle timelines with new state timelines, aligns the match cap for the Auditor’s election with the amount needed to mount a competitive bid for that office, ensures penalties are paid in accordance with administrative rules, permits campaigns to collect allowable contributions prior to filing notice, and delegates to the Portland Elections Commission whether to except contributions from candidates from certification threshold requirements and to find a way to enable candidates who ran for a different office to participate in Small Donor Elections without penalty if they later run for city office in the same election cycle.

Official proposal and impact statement
What would stay the same

The reviewed sources do not clearly identify every existing policy, service, contract, or obligation that would remain unchanged.

Official matter record
Who may be affected

This ordinance is based on recommendations from the Portland Elections Commission, an advisory body composed of members who collectively reflect the diversity of Portland and have related subject matter expertise. The recommendations were created after conducting deep user experience research and quantitative campaign finance data research, all of which is published in a public report on the program’s website.

Official community impact statement
What happens next

Passed

Latest official agenda appearance
02 · Evaluate it

What the record establishes and what it does not.

Votes show choices. They do not, by themselves, prove why a member made that choice.

Rationale review not yet published

We will not turn the roll call into invented arguments.

The vote above establishes who supported or opposed that exact motion. A source-validated account of the competing reasons will appear only after human review of the meeting transcript and documents.

Open questions
  • The source-linked record has not yet received a human review of competing arguments. A yes or no vote alone does not establish a Councilor’s rationale.
  • What implementation evidence will show whether the intended result occurred?
Can residents still participate?

Official testimony on this decision has closed. Residents can still contact their district Councilors about implementation and follow-up.

Official Council agenda
03 · Verify it

Inspect the complete research record.

Official text, source files, exact motions, roll calls, provenance, and the technical completeness check remain available without crowding the explanation above.

Official documents1 sources
Final legal actionOrdinance 192098

The operative official record after Council action.

Open at Portland.gov
Read the full official text

The City of Portland ordains. Section 1. The Council finds: The City Charter requires the Independent Portland Elections Commission to implement the Small Donor Elections program.The Commission analyzes the performance of the Small Donor Elections program after each election cycle, using user experience research and quantitative campaign finance data.The Commission makes recommendations on improving the Small Donor Elections program and keep it aligned with a constantly changing electoral and campaign finance landscape.The Independent Portland Elections Commission concluded in their analysis of the performance of the Small Donor Elections program in the 2024 election cycle that, with adequate funding and their recommendations implemented, the Small Donor Elections program is “well positioned to ensure Portland’s democracy is increasingly fair, reflective, equitable, and inclusive, experiences high participation among multiple measures, and results in a government that is increasingly accountable to all Portlanders.”The Code amendments are necessary to adopt changes the Commission recommended, to improve the program, by aligning its timeline with new state law, aligning the program design with the campaign finance landscape, and preventing challenges that emerged in the last election cycle from recurring. NOW, THEREFORE, the Council directs: Amend City Code Chapter 2.16 as shown in Exhibit A.

Meetings, motions, amendments, and votes4 meetings · 2 votes
Read all 1 exact motions
Aug 11, 2025 · Main · Passed

Motion to send Ordinance, Document Number 2025-310, to the full Council with the recommendation that it be adopted: Moved by Ryan and seconded by Pirtle-Guiney. (Aye (5): Clark, Dunphy, Pirtle-Guiney, Ryan, Koyama Lane)

Final Council action · Sep 24, 202511 yes · 1 no

Final action on 2025-310: Amend Small Donor Elections Code to adopt the recommendations of the Portland Elections Commission (amend Code Chapter 2.16)

Meeting-level motion or recommendation · Aug 11, 20255 yes

Motion to send Ordinance, Document Number 2025-310, to the full Council with the recommendation that it be adopted: Moved by Ryan and seconded by Pirtle-Guiney. (Aye (5): Clark, Dunphy, Pirtle-Guiney, Ryan, Koyama Lane)

Data quality, timeline, and provenanceRules v2
Why technical findings are hidden above

Unreviewed keyword matches and machine-extracted fragments are not presented as authoritative findings. Only 0 human-reviewed findings are available for this matter.

Technical information-completeness check · Ready With Caveats

This checks whether decision-relevant categories appear in the published packet. It does not recommend approval or opposition.

Decision definition

The official title and operative text identify the requested action.

Complete
Official legal text

Official text was found. This check does not certify that every referenced exhibit is complete.

Complete
Financial impact

The official impact statement includes financial information.

Complete
Funding source

The impact statement identifies funding information without an explicit unresolved-source qualifier.

Complete
Supporting documents

No linked attachments were found on the official page.

Unknown
Referenced exhibit integrity

The text references exhibits. This guide has not yet automatically verified that each referenced exhibit is present, populated, and internally consistent.

Unknown
Counterparty acceptance

The reviewed action is not expressly identified as a non-binding agreement.

Not Applicable
Implementation

A direction, reporting requirement, or deadline appears in the official text.

Complete
Document stability

Stability requires at least two observed snapshots; the system will update this after another ingestion.

Unknown
Source record
First discovered
Aug 13, 2026, 1:11 PM PDT
Last checked
Sep 13, 2026, 2:30 AM PDT
Evidence hash
c277d33a12f7f588
Guide status
Deterministic baseline
Append-only timeline
  1. SOURCE UPDATED

    Passed

  2. DOCUMENT PUBLISHED

    Observed in the official source.

  3. Council Action

    Passed

  4. Council Action

    Passed to second reading

  5. Council Action

    Rescheduled

  6. Council Action

    Referred to City Council