Camas Matters

08/24/2026

Camas traffic engineering, where apparently the road markings are more of a suggestion than an actual description of the road.

Want to go straight onto Hood Drive from 16th? Get in the left lane.

Want to follow the freshly painted turn arrow LEFT? Well… there’s no turn. Just a curb. 😂 Apparently the City of Camas has introduced a new traffic-calming feature: turn directly into concrete.

Drive carefully, folks. And maybe don’t blindly trust the arrows. 🫣

08/20/2026

The members of Camas Matters just love Dallas (and the staff at Lutz Hardware). Support local business!

Dallas the store cat has chosen his new favorite color!

As always, we're here for paint project consultation, color matching, and quality time with cats. Proudly serving Camas, and carrying Valspar Paint, since 1950.

08/18/2026

CAMAS CITY COUNCIL JUST VOTED TO SPEND $50,000+ SOLVING A PROBLEM THEY STILL CAN'T IDENTIFY.

Last night, Camas City Council voted to move forward with putting a fundamental change in our city government—from Strong Mayor to Council-Manager on a February 2027 special-election ballot.

Not November 2027. Not after a community survey. Not after several town halls. One event and personal agendas are driving this change. At a cost of more than $50,000 to taxpayers.

And the most important question remains unanswered:

WHAT PROBLEM ARE WE ACTUALLY SOLVING?

Councilmember Tim Hein asked exactly that. He noted that Camas has a AAA rating, a strong strategic plan and a functioning government, while facing actual problems, including a potential structural budget deficit. He suggested more town halls, a community survey and maximizing voter turnout. He also said the feedback he'd seen was roughly 60% AGAINST and 40% FOR the change.

Councilmember Jennifer Senescu was even more direct: “If you're in touch with what our citizens want, this is going to fail.”

So what problem did supporters identify? Councilmember John Nohr finally gave us one:

“We are one election away from chaos, always.”

His concern? A hypothetical future mayor who could someday “wreak absolute chaos” on Camas. That's not identifying a broken government. That's inventing a boogeyman.

The contradictions continued.

Marty Elzingre initially opposed spending $50,000 on what he called a “wild goose chase.” Even after deciding the question should go to voters, he opposed February, saying he wanted more time, more town halls, more discussion and greater voter participation. The irony is thick in the room. More time, more discussions, but let's just stick it on the ballot and stick the cost to the residents in the process.

Marilyn Bourke likewise talked about holding additional town halls and reaching “as many people as we can”—while supporting a February election. Translation: We need more public engagement—but let's rush toward the ballot before we actually have it.

And Mayor Steve Hogan? This was an opportunity for leadership on one of the biggest structural decisions Camas has faced in decades. Instead, Hogan essentially told Council he'd be happy either way and would retire early if voters approve the change.

Meanwhile, former Mayor Nan Henriksen, the architect and leading advocate of this effort, continues pushing the change. But Council isn't supposed to govern according to Nan Henriksen's vision. They're supposed to represent the people who elected them.

We've seen this movie before.

Remember the 2019 pool bond? City leadership pushed it onto the ballot—and voters demolished it roughly 90% to 10%. Apparently nobody kept the DVD in an era where physical media is making a comeback.

Because we're doing it again:

Push an idea from City Hall. Hold limited public engagement.
Discount the opposition. Spend taxpayer money putting it on the ballot. Then discover what residents actually think.

There's nothing wrong with letting voters decide. But “let the voters decide” isn't an excuse for Council to avoid doing its homework first.

Before spending $50,000+, Council should be able to answer three simple questions:

What specifically is broken?
Why can't it be fixed under our existing government?
Where is the evidence residents are demanding this change?

Last night's discussion didn't answer them.

Camas doesn't need to restructure its government because someday the Boogeyman might get elected Mayor. Sorry John Norr, go fight fires and leave the adulting to adults.

It needs good candidates, competent leadership, checks and balances—and elected officials who actually listen before making decisions.

February 2027 is starting to look a lot like Pool Bond 2.0.

08/17/2026

Congrats to a local business for such a prestigious award. And everyone here agrees K&M has the best burger (and fries, and well even the coffee shake). Much love that they also donate to the Humane Society. Please continue supporting local business!

GREAT NEWS! K&M Drive-In was just awarded 2026 Best of Clark County in the hamburger category! Our one little restaurant was voted, by the public, Best of Clark County! We have a great crew who we consider like family! A big thank you to those who voted and support us! It is an honor to be a part of this community! We are humbled by this recognition.
- Kevin & Melinda

08/12/2026

Just a reminder if you haven’t seen the signs, if you need a new mattress consider purchasing from Camas High fundraiser!

08/11/2026

**BEFORE YOU BUY THE “STRONG COUNCIL” SALES PITCH, TAKE A GOOD LOOK AT WHO’S SELLING IT.**

Camas is being asked to consider fundamentally changing its form of government from Strong Mayor to Strong Council. Supporters will undoubtedly tell residents this is about professionalism, efficiency and better government.

But before accepting that pitch, perhaps we should talk about judgment, transparency and how some of the people supporting this change have historically viewed public participation.

Start with Nan Henriksen, one of the driving forces behind this effort.

This is the same Nan Henriksen who endorsed a City Council candidate who later ended up in an altercation with a resident involving a rock and a gun. He avoided a trial and possibly prison time by pleading out to a gross misdemeanor (Svilarich is PRO-Strong Council BTW).

Does an endorsement make Nan responsible for someone else's subsequent actions? Of course not. But when someone is helping lead the charge to fundamentally restructure our city government, **judgment is absolutely fair game for scrutiny.**

Then there's former Mayor and Councilmember **Ellen Burton**, another supporter of Strong Council.

Burton's own emails provide an interesting glimpse into her attitude toward residents challenging City Hall. When a resident complained about people using public comment at Council meetings, Burton responded:

“I will mention at the next Council workshop that I’m hearing support for limiting the comment sessions so we can accomplish our work.”

She continued:

“I won’t let those guys pressure us on the public comment period. Council meetings are business meetings.”

Notice something important: one resident complained—and Burton transformed that into “I’m hearing support” for limiting public comment.

But it gets considerably worse.

When that same resident subsequently emailed Burton and then-Councilmember **Greg Anderson** celebrating that two Camas residents had been “booted off Nextdoor,”Anderson responded:

“On behalf of myself and my family, Swati, Thank you!”

Burton followed:

“I echo that sentiment. Thank you, Swati.”

READ THAT AGAIN -

Two sitting Camas City Councilmembers thanked a resident after she reported successfully getting other Camas residents removed from a community discussion platform.

Whatever anyone thinks of those residents or what they were saying, ask yourself a very simple question: Is that the attitude toward public participation we want from the people telling us how Camas should restructure its government?

It becomes even more remarkable considering that Burton later wrote that “it’s important all voices are heard, even those one doesn’t like to hear.”

Exactly.

So which philosophy should Camas residents believe?

“All voices should be heard”?

Or thanking someone when inconvenient voices disappear?

And Greg Anderson's involvement shouldn't simply be brushed aside either. After Burton connected Anderson with the resident, he established direct communication and offered to answer her questions about other people's posts and comments concerning city activities. Later, Anderson again thanked her for her “energy & support” and said her efforts were “appreciated by many.”

Now these are among the voices we're supposed to trust when we're told “Strong Council will produce better, more accountable government?”

That's… quite a sales pitch.

Because here's the part residents should really think about:

Strong Council places tremendous importance on the Council itself.

So when people who have served on that Council advocate giving the Council-centered system more authority, their philosophy toward public scrutiny, dissent and resident involvement matters.

This isn't about whether you like Nan Henriksen, Ellen Burton or Greg Anderson. And it isn't proof that Strong Council is inherently bad.

It's about whether the people selling you “better government” have demonstrated the kind of transparency, judgment and respect for dissent that you want embedded in that government.

We believe the answer is a resounding “NO”. Camas residents aren't an inconvenience.

Public comment isn't an obstacle preventing government from getting its “work” done.

Criticism isn't something elected officials should celebrate seeing removed from public discussion.

**Residents ARE the reason for the work.**

So before voting to fundamentally change how Camas is governed, don't just listen to the polished presentation about Strong Council.

Look at who's selling it.
Look at what they've said.
Look at what they've done when residents challenged them.

And then ask yourself one question:

Does this change give Camas residents a stronger voice—or does it make it easier for City Hall to tune that voice out?

Don't let the people advocating the change answer that question for you.

You answer it. Show up on the 11th and ask the questions that need to be asked. Let your voice be heard.

08/10/2026

Move to a Councilor-Manager government structure? Battle Ground's current setup just got real interesting and presents the alternative to a strong mayor structure.

Tensions flare during a heated Battle Ground City Council meeting r...

08/07/2026

**OPINION | Camas Matters**

FORM OF GOVERNMENT

Before Camas changes how it's governed, someone should show the math. There's a town hall Tuesday. Here's why we think you should be there:

**What's proposed**

Move from our current "strong mayor" system — where we elect the mayor as the city's chief executive — to a "council-manager" system, where the council hires a professional city manager as CEO and the mayor becomes one voting member of council.

Think of it as the difference between electing the CEO directly and electing a board that hires the CEO.

**The timeline**

• Aug. 11 — Town hall

• Aug. 17 — Council votes on whether to draft a resolution

• Any change would go to Camas voters — possibly Nov. 2026, Feb. 2027, or Aug. 2027

**Who studied this?**

A citizen committee recommended the change in June: seven residents, appointed by the mayor and approved by council. Four had previously held Camas elected office — two former mayors and two former councilors, including both co-chairs. It met four times, 90 minutes each. Public input wasn't part of its charge.

Two members dissented. One argued the current system "has served the city well for nearly 40 years" and that nothing has been shown to be failing.

**Here's what bothers us**

The committee's first stated decision criterion was "fiscal responsibility with taxpayer money." The report contains no cost estimates. Not for a city manager's salary. Not for transition costs. Not for severance. Not for the city's revenue structure. The analysis is entirely qualitative — the only numbers in the document are counts of other cities.

You can verify that yourself in five minutes. The report is public.

**What's actually being decided**

Camas governs by fiscal metrics first. The city holds a AAA bond rating — the highest available — which it credits with saving $1.5 million on its 2023 bond. It plans capital on a decades-long horizon. And to close a structural budget gap it has added a 2% utility tax, created a transportation benefit district, and taken its full 1% property tax increase.

The committee's case is that this kind of long-horizon management works better insulated from the election cycle — that Camas should "plan governance for where they are going," because "waiting for a problem or crisis means making changes reactively." Their report lists as a disadvantage of the current system that "voters don't evaluate mayor's administrative experience in terms of complexity of city operations."

That is a serious argument, made in good faith, and plenty of thoughtful people find it persuasive.

But here is what it means in practice: council-manager moves authorship of the city budget from someone you elect to someone you don't. Today the mayor proposes the budget and answers to voters for it. Under the new form, an appointed manager proposes it and the council approves it.

And Washington law places **no cap** on the tax a city charges on its own water, sewer, stormwater and solid waste utilities. No voter approval required.

Supporters see professionalism. We see distance. Both of us are describing the same mechanism — which is exactly why residents, not committees, should weigh it.

**Two things nobody should claim**

1) That this saves money. Decades of research comparing the two forms is genuinely mixed. Several studies find no measurable efficiency difference. The most rigorously designed one — tracking cities that actually switched — found spending was *lower* under mayor-council. Anyone promising savings, or predicting tax hikes, is going beyond the evidence.

2) That it guarantees stability. Vancouver, Washougal, Battle Ground and Ridgefield all use council-manager — though statewide, mayor-council remains the majority, 147 of 197 code cities. This week the Battle Ground City Council voted 4-3 to fire its city manager without cause, triggering severance equal to a year of salary and benefits. Several councilors said they weren't given notice of the meeting, and that the manager had received a positive review shortly before. Camas, by the committee's own count, has had five mayors in fifteen years.

Both forms carry risk. They just put it in different places.

**Where we land**

We're not telling you how to vote on council-manager. It may well be right for Camas.

We're saying this: a committee that named fiscal responsibility as its top criterion produced no fiscal analysis, and six days after the only public meeting on the subject, council votes on whether to draft a resolution.

**Ask them to show the math first.**

What does a city manager cost versus the current administrator? What are the transition costs? What severance terms would the contract carry? What happens to the utility tax lever?

Those are answerable questions. They should be answered before a resolution is drafted, not after. Camas shouldn't be rushing this decision at all.

📍 **Form of Government Town Hall**

🗓 Tuesday, Aug. 11, 5:00–7:00 p.m.

📌 Zellerbach Administration Center (ZAC), 841 NE 22nd Ave

Councilor John Nohr says he wants to hear from "a good cross section — not just business owners, not just developers, but residents whose lives are impacted by our government each and every day."

So give him one. Show up. Ask questions. Challenge this change of government and why it's being rushed. Nohr has made it all but clear he wants this on the ballot, and he hasn't heard from you, the residents that pay taxes, yet.

The committee's full report, including both minority reports, is in the June 1 council workshop packet at https://www.cityofcamas.us

Read it and decide for yourself. 🌿

08/05/2026

Just a reminder, put August 11, 5-7pm on your calendar and please attend this town hall. How your city is governed is something you should care about.

The City of Camas is exploring a possible change to its form of government, and we want to hear from you.

Join us for a Town Hall, Tuesday, Aug. 11, from 5 - 7 p.m., at the Camas School District Zellerbach Administration Center (ZAC) to learn more about what this potential change could mean for our community, ask questions and share your thoughts. Your input is an important part of the conversation as we consider the future of our city.

The Form of Government Committee report and presentation materials can be found at the bottom of the page here: https://www.cityofcamas.us/citycouncil/page/form-government-town-hall-aug-11-2026
Zoom Link: https://cityofcamas-us.zoom.us/j/82748425103

08/04/2026

School isn't even back in session, but apparently one Skyridge Middle School showoff just couldn't wait a few extra seconds for the flashing yellow arrow. Instead, he changed lanes mid-intersection and cut left directly in front of another driver.

This isn't an isolated incident, either. We've received reports of the same driver treating NW 16th like his own personal drag strip. The rumor? He allegedly told a neighbor he's friends with Camas PD and they won't do anything about it.

That's a bold claim.

It would be nice to find out whether it's true—or whether Camas Police Department plans to remind everyone that traffic laws apply to everyone, not just the people without connections.
Thanks to the follower who sent us the dash cam footage.