Trying to add a payment method? You can do this on the 
Today, the Lookout Eugene-Springfield Editorial Board is announcing its endorsements in the runoff elections for Eugene City Council and Lane County Board of Commissioners, as well as the contested race for Springfield City Council.
The editorial board asked the Eugene and Lane County candidates how their views on the race have changed since the May primary. And it met with Springfield City Councilor Jill Cuadros and opponent Callee Ackland to better understand their positions on issues affecting the city.
On Wednesday, the editorial board announced its endorsements for Oregon legislative races. Yesterday, it released its endorsements for governor, Congress and U.S. Senate. Tomorrow, the editorial board will round out general election endorsements with its picks for local ballot measures.
All of Lookout’s general election coverage free for all readers so they can learn about the candidates and issues on the November ballot.
Eugene City Council: Mike Clark
In May, we endorsed incumbent Mike Clark over Athena Aguiar and fellow challenger Jasmine Hatmaker in the primary election race for Eugene City Council representing Ward 5.
Our endorsement then was less about the candidates than the circumstances, and that remains the case. We simply view Clark as the better candidate to make the unpopular decisions we think City Council will soon have to make.
When voters cast their primary ballots, the council was grappling with what it thought was a $2.2 million annual budget deficit, which it would have to fix through some combination of spending cuts and tax or fee increases.
We’ve since learned the annual deficit is actually $5.1 million. Without any action, the city’s cash reserves would be completely depleted within six years, budget officials project.
Clark and Aguiar have sharpened their policy differences since the primary. Aguiar has thrown her support behind the Eugene Clean Energy Fund ballot measure, which would charge a fee on the gross profits of large companies to fund energy-efficiency projects across the city. Clark has questioned the value of any policy that could increase costs for Eugene residents, echoing the argument of fund opponents that affected companies would pass the costs to customers.
Regardless of the merits of that argument, there’s a good chance the next Ward 5 councilor will have to vote for cuts to services Eugene residents value. We see no situation where a $5.1 million deficit can be resolved with new taxes or fees alone.
Can Clark be divisive? Yes. Has he made comments in the past that we’ve found off-putting? Also yes. But speaking unpopular truths about the fiscal stability of the city, and having difficult conversations with constituents, are two things he excels at.
For those reasons, we’re sticking with our endorsement of Clark for another term. In four years, maybe it will be time for a change. But he’s the right candidate for the difficult moment Eugene faces.
Springfield City Council: Callee Ackland
Good news, Springfield voters: Whether you vote for Callee Ackland or Jill Cuadros to serve out the rest of Beth Blackwell’s term on the City Council, you’ll be getting an intelligent, detail-oriented leader who wants to make life better for residents.
But it’s long past time for the Springfield City Council to become more representative of the city as a whole. That means hearing newer, younger voices than the council has typically attracted. It’s why we endorse Ackland to complete Blackwell’s term representing Ward 4 on the council, which runs through 2028.
To be sure, Ackland and Cuadros both deeply impress us. In discussions with the Editorial Board, Cuadros recalled the hours she spends poring over city records and meeting documents each week to understand an issue coming before the council, in addition to her work as support services director at Eugene School District 4J. She’s experienced with budgets and well-qualified for the demands of the role.
Yet we were puzzled by the City Council’s decision in April to appoint Cuadros to the position through the election, after first deadlocking on whether to appoint Ackland or another candidate, Luke McAllister, to the seat. Both received more letters of support from Springfield residents than Cuadros. Despite multiple councilors saying they were taking community input seriously, the process had the feel of council going out its way to pick a like-minded candidate instead of the one with the most public support.
Ackland has convinced us her relative youth won’t be a barrier to effective leadership on the council. She boasts an impressive resume as a Navy veteran, previous small business owner and tenant support specialist helping renters navigate complex housing situations. As a member of the Springfield Planning Commission and the Lane County Community Health Improvement Coalition, she knows enough about the ins and outs of government to realize that bringing about change requires more than protest slogans.
We’d be remiss if we didn’t note that this race has brought out more mudslinging than we’re comfortable with. Not by the candidates themselves, to be sure, but by small groups of their most passionate supporters. We’ve heard Cuadros labeled as corrupt because she received campaign contributions between $1,500 and $2,500 from Lane County businesses. We’ve heard people say she supports spying on Springfield residents because she opposes Flock cameras, but sees potential for automated license-plate reader technology if used properly. Nonsense.
We’ve also heard accusations by Cuadros supporters of threats from Ackland supporters, and claims that fictitious Ackland supporters are writing comments criticizing Cuadros. We’ve seen plenty of evidence of fired-up bases, but no evidence of any danger to anyone involved.
When the dust settles on this heated campaign, Springfielders will need to work together, as they always have, to address issues like filling budget gaps and funding important services. While we endorse Ackland in this race, what may be most important is that the winner receives the respect — and the honest chance to work for her constituents — that she deserves.
Lane County Commission: Heather Buch
Like the Eugene City Council runoff, our endorsement of Heather Buch for East Lane county commissioner is unchanged from the May primary.
We expect the Lane County Board of Commissioners to confront major decisions on wide-ranging policy issues next year, which would significantly affect rural residents in Buch’s district.
There’s a possible tax levy to fund rural sheriff patrols. There’s the impact of Trump administration cuts to low-income healthcare and food assistance, which will squeeze social safety net programs hard next year. And there’s the ongoing recovery work from the Holiday Farm Fire along the McKenzie River.
Each issue poses unique problems to work through, and different stakeholders to engage with. The right person for the job is equally enthusiastic about partnering with the sheriff on law enforcement funding solutions, and the director of a rural health clinic on how local government can support it. We think Buch is the commissioner best suited for the full body of work required.
Buch’s support of the troubled CleanLane recycling project has given her opponent, Jake Pelroy, a formidable line of attack. We’re concerned about the repeated setbacks, the diversion of garbage by haulers to landfills outside of Lane County and the financial risks if the county is late to deliver on the project.
But county commissioner isn’t a single-issue job. That’s not to say Pelroy has staked his entire campaign on opposition to CleanLane. He’s also spoken about the need to improve law enforcement coverage across the county, increase timber harvests and reform the county’s land management system to spur new housing and business development.
Another benefit of reelecting Buch is maintaining some semblance of partisan balance on the board. She and South Lane Commissioner Laurie Trieger consistently vote as a block, and are frequently on the short end of 3-2 votes led by the board’s conservative majority (technically these races are nonpartisan, but the board has long been highly factional).
We think a 3-2 split will lead to far more debate — and hopefully compromise — than a 4-1 conservative majority. For those reasons, we feel Buch is the right candidate for another four-year term.
