How Mayoral Turnover Forced Camas, WA to Put Council-Manager Government on the Ballot

The city of Camas, Washington, is facing a governance crisis born of its own rapid expansion. On August 17, 2026, the Camas City Council voted 4-3 to draft a resolution that will ask voters to fundamentally restructure the municipality's government, abandoning its century-old "strong mayor" system.

The proposed ballot measure, slated for a special election in February 2027, would shift the city to a council-manager format, transferring day-to-day executive power from an elected mayor to an appointed professional administrator. The narrow vote reflects a community grappling with the growing pains of a mid-sized city, caught between the desire to maintain direct democratic accountability and the administrative necessity of hiring professional management to handle increasingly complex municipal operations.[1][2]

The push for structural reform follows a period of intense executive instability at City Hall. Before current Mayor Steve Hogan took office in 2023, Camas cycled through three different mayors in a span of just three years. The breaking point for many civic leaders came in May 2021, when Mayor Barry McDonnell—who had won a historic write-in campaign against an incumbent—abruptly resigned just over a year into his term.

In his resignation statement, McDonnell cited the unsustainable burden of balancing a full-time private sector job, his family responsibilities, and the daily operational demands of running a growing city. The turnover highlighted a structural flaw: the city was relying on part-time elected officials to perform full-time executive duties.[1][3]

Under the current mayor-council system, the elected mayor serves as the chief executive officer of Camas, directly overseeing city departments, drafting the annual budget, and managing municipal personnel. While this model is the most common form of municipal government in the United States, it places immense administrative responsibility on a single elected official who may not necessarily have a background in public administration or finance.

In Camas, the mayor's role is technically classified as a part-time position, yet it demands full-time executive oversight to manage the city's infrastructure, public safety, and development projects. This hybrid reality often forces mayors to rely heavily on an appointed city administrator, though ultimate authority and accountability remain concentrated in the mayor's office.[4][6]

As Camas's population approaches 28,000—and is projected to grow by nearly 40 percent over the next two decades—the administrative complexity has simply outpaced the traditional governance structure. The city is facing mounting pressure to expand utilities, process development permits, and maintain streets for a booming residential base.

"We are one election away from chaos, always," City Councilor John Nohr argued during the August council meeting, pointing to the inherent risk of electing an unprepared executive to manage a rapidly expanding municipal budget and workforce. Recognizing these systemic vulnerabilities, Mayor Hogan, who announced he will not seek re-election at the end of his term, convened a special citizen advisory committee in March 2026 to explore alternative forms of government that could provide long-term stability for the community.[1][2]

In June 2026, that advisory committee—which notably included two former Camas mayors, Nan Henriksen and Ellen Burton—formally recommended transitioning to a council-manager government. In this alternative model, the elected city council serves as the primary legislative and policy-making body, while a highly trained, non-partisan city manager is hired by the council to execute those policies and run daily operations.

The mayor would remain an elected position but would transition to a largely ceremonial role, presiding over council meetings and representing the city at official functions without exercising unilateral executive power or veto authority. This separation of political representation from administrative execution is designed to insulate the city's day-to-day functions from electoral volatility.[2][5]

Proponents of the ballot measure argue that the council-manager system brings necessary professionalization to municipal management. Former Mayor Henriksen, who chaired the advisory committee, noted that top-tier municipal professionals actively seek out cities with a council-manager structure because it provides clearly defined authority and allows them to operate based on professional performance standards rather than political allegiances.

By hiring a manager with specific degrees and experience in urban planning and public finance, the city can ensure consistent service delivery regardless of who wins the mayoral race. Supporters also point out that the model is already utilized successfully by a majority of neighboring cities in Clark County, including Vancouver, Battle Ground, Ridgefield, and Washougal. For these advocates, the transition is a necessary evolution for a city that has outgrown its small-town administrative roots.[1][2]

However, the proposed transition has sparked significant pushback from residents and a vocal minority on the city council, who view the shift as a dangerous dilution of democratic accountability. By transferring executive authority from a directly elected mayor to an appointed manager, critics argue that the city is handing power to an unelected bureaucrat who cannot be easily held accountable by voters at the ballot box.

During public comment periods, residents expressed frustration that a hired official might prioritize administrative efficiency over the specific desires of the community. For these opponents, the ability to vote a chief executive out of office is the ultimate safeguard against poor municipal management, and they view the council-manager system as a relinquishing of citizen power.[1][2]

The narrow 4-3 council vote to draft the resolution reflects this deep community divide. Councilors who voted against moving forward cited resident feedback indicating broad satisfaction with the current system and a desire for more extensive public engagement before rushing a ballot measure. If the resolution is formally approved at the council's September meeting, it will trigger a special election in February 2027.

In the intervening months, the city plans to hold a series of town halls to educate the public on the mechanics of both systems. Ultimately, the voters of Camas will have to decide whether to preserve their century-old tradition of direct executive elections or embrace a corporate-style management structure to navigate their city's rapid expansion.[1][2]