The Philomath City Council adopted a resolution denouncing violence during its Dec. 8 meeting at City Hall, though not before debating proposed amendments that sparked discussion about law enforcement and the scope of the document.
The resolution passed 6-1 with City Councilor Jessica Andrade casting the lone dissenting vote after her suggested amendments failed to gain approval.
Resolution 25-26 proclaims that the council “unequivocally condemns political violence and reaffirms the right of every member of our community to safely and respectfully express their ideas, identities, and beliefs without fear or intimidation.”
The document, which had been tabled at the council’s Nov. 3 meeting to allow for additional review, cites an increase in politically motivated acts of violence and intimidation throughout the country. It calls upon community members to engage in volunteerism and civic life as ways to combat polarization and strengthen civil society.
The resolution also states that leaders “must not use the horror of political violence as an excuse to further restrict freedom of speech and expression, to suppress nonviolent movements, curb freedom of assembly, encourage retaliation, or otherwise close civic discourse and civic spaces.”
Mayor Christopher McMorran, Andrade and City Councilor Brent Kaseman had met to discuss potential edits to the document, but Andrade emailed additional proposed amendments prior to the meeting.
“Thinking about it some more, it helped me kind of figure out how to define certain concepts that we were trying to get at,” Andrade said.
Kaseman said he was happy with the original draft and that the revised version in councilors’ meeting materials was more concise yet just as powerful. He suggested moving forward with what was before them.
Andrade shared thoughts on statements in the document related to nuances in the definition of political violence.
“Arguably, withholding SNAP benefits is political violence towards people who need food to survive and who can’t get a job,” she said. “There are a lot bigger examples than fully physical violence, which it sounded like was the focus … and specifically with regards to circumvent democracy to eliminate choices by doing harm unto others.”
Among Andrade’s proposed amendments was language stating the city “will not grant law enforcement additional punitive, surveillance, or other retaliatory measures against its citizens.” She also suggested adding references to violence committed by law enforcement alongside violence by private individuals.
McMorran expressed concerns about proposed language referencing surveillance of citizens.
“It is an active priority of the City Council to install more security cameras in parks,” he said. “And it’s not an active priority of the City Council, but it has been in the recent past to increase our police staffing.”
City Councilor Diane Crocker said she was fine with the resolution as presented but was “somewhat offended” by proposed language involving law enforcement.
“It almost sounds accusatory that they’re being punitive and I do not see that here in Philomath,” Crocker said. “I respect our law enforcement — I think they are honorable and strong people and I don’t want any reference to them possibly doing something wrong and that’s exactly what I got from that and I had a very strong response to this.”
City Councilor Teresa Nielson felt the resolution was adequate as presented with clear language. City Councilor Rich Saalsaa added, “I think we’re not in a position to tell the police department what they should and shouldn’t do from this perspective.”
City Councilor Spencer Irwin said he’s not in favor of all types of surveillance and also not a fan of a particular type of policing violence that he believes has become mainstream.
“I don’t think that our officers are engaging in that — I want to be really clear, I think we have a lovely police community with kind officers that are doing their best,” Irwin said, comments that brought nods of approval from Andrade. “But I think if you’re going to denounce political violence, you have to acknowledge that people are being violently arrested for maybe or maybe not breaking the law.”
Andrade clarified that her suggested edits were not meant to be interpreted as her viewing the local police unfavorably.
“I’m unaware of any sorts of problems that people have with our police department,” she said. “The main reason … of bringing this up was because most physical violence that have political ends to it … are enacted by law enforcement. I’m not saying Philomath law enforcement, I’m saying law enforcement in general, especially when speaking about ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) and other agencies.”
McMorran responded by arguing for keeping the proclamation’s language general rather than adding specific callouts, saying he believed the broader language already covered all forms of politically motivated violence, including violence by law enforcement. He also questioned the practical value of addressing issues outside the city’s control.
Andrade suggested that the city does have authority over the police department and can provide guidance on policing practices, and that explicitly naming certain issues in a proclamation could serve as a commitment to avoid problematic behaviors.
Saalsaa said he understood Andrade’s perspective but felt such details would blindside the police chief and that the council would be approving a resolution without any of his input.
Kaseman said his thoughts on the resolution were more limited in scope and that in short, “we should be able to speak about things without being under the threat of physical violence.”
Kaseman made a motion to approve the resolution as presented without any of the late edits brought forward by Andrade. Nielson seconded the motion.
Before a final vote, Andrade made a motion to amend but it failed on a 4-3 vote, with Crocker, Kaseman, Nielson and Saalsaa voting nay.
The final vote followed with the resolution adopted by the 6-1 margin.