Readers respond: Good intentions gone astray in small donor program

As often happens in our city, good intentions go astray as unintended consequences come to the fore. Such is the case with Portland's Small Donor Elections program. It was rightfully intended to keep big money out of elections, but has run into an issue involving candidates reciprocating donations, (" Most candidates for Portland mayor and City Council sent reciprocated contributions to other candidates, raising legal questions ," Sept. 10).

With our new form of government, we now have many candidates running for city office with 47 qualifying for city matching funds in this election cycle so far, for a total to date of over $2.2 million. Since the inception of the program in 2020, more than $7 million has been allocated.

As a taxpayer and candidate , I want to see greater clarity about the rules and more transparency on how the matching portion of funds are spent. This should include a list of pre-approved local and union vendors, so we can reinvest these public funds in local businesses for the purchase of campaign merchandise. There should be stipulations on how matching funds are spent and what percentage of funds are spent on democracy building activities. We should be investing in local journalism rather than Facebook ads.

Just as the city needs to review its contracts, candidates should vet how they expend taxpayer dollars. If we continue down the path of the small donor elections program, our future city councilors should practice good governance and fiscal responsibility before they are elected. There are many lessons to be learned in this elections season. Next time around, let's make sure we get it right.