FILE - A man walks into Portland City Hall on Nov. 12, 2025, in Portland, Ore.
Eli Imadali / OPB
Oregon’s ethics commission is poised to rule Friday on whether or not six Portland City Councilors violated state ethics laws by holding a private retreat last summer.
Investigators with the state agency have recommended that the eight-person commission dismiss the case. “It does not appear the Peacock members violated [state law],” reads the analysis submitted by state ethics investigators, referring to the self-appointed nickname for the six more progressive members of City Council.
The six Peacock councilors, which stands for “progressive caucus” – Candace Avalos, Jamie Dunphy, Mitch Green, Sameer Kanal, Tiffany Koyama-Lane and Angelita Morillo – all attended a private afternoon retreat in a city building in August 2025.
The meeting, coordinated by Avalos, was intended as a place to “regroup” after a rollercoaster budget cycle and to align on shared goals for the year, according to the agenda.
A month later, a Portlander named Ciatta Thompson submitted a complaint to the state ethics commission, alleging that the Peacock retreat violated state ethics laws. (Thompson is a one-time council candidate and current Republican candidate in Oregon’s House District 33 race).
Under state public meetings law, a quorum of any elected body cannot meet privately “for the purpose of deciding on or deliberating toward a decision on any matter.”
On Portland’s 12-person city council, seven people make up a quorum – meaning the six were free to meet.
But Thompson’s complaint focused on the fact that the August meeting resulted in a quorum of several different council committees.
Committees each have five members, meaning three people make up a quorum. A quorum of four different city council committees was present at the August meeting.
The state investigators don’t dispute this in their report. However, they found that councilors didn’t make any deliberations or decisions related to the work of those committees during that meeting.
“Rather, it appears the Members avoided policy discussion and focused on interpersonal communications,” the report reads.
According to interviews with councilors and public records related to the August meeting obtained by investigators, the retreat focused more on unpacking the high drama of recent council budget discussions than actual policymaking.
“The communications appear to also fall within the allowed exceptions” of the state public meetings law, the investigators conclude.
The state ethics commission will meet on Friday to consider this determination.
The commissioners can either choose to dismiss the complaints against the six councilors or decide on their own that the councilors did, in fact, violate state law.
Thompson, the person who filed the original ethics complaint, did not immediately respond to OPB’s request to comment.
Last month, the same commission dismissed another complaint made against five of the six Peacock members. That complaint alleged that councilors violated state ethics laws by accepting free legal help.
Since the August meeting, several members of the Peacock group, including Council President Jamie Dunphy, have stopped attending Peacock meetings to demonstrate their commitment to transparency.
