The most dramatic step the board could take would be to ask for Adams resignation. If they decided to do so, should they do it immediately, for the next days newspaper, or wait? Alternatively, they could urge Portland voters to organize a recall electionbut under Oregon law, a recall election could not take place until an official had held office for six months. The board could withhold judgment entirely until more facts about the situation trickled in. Or the board could acknowledge the revelations as embarrassing, but remind voters that Adams was still best-qualified to lead the city among the other candidates who had run against him for mayor. There was no obvious replacement should he leave office, and the board agreed that Portland was badly in need of strong leadership. Attig spoke first. He thought Adams should resign. He says:

He admitted that hed lied to voters and didnt feel that he could tell the truth prior to the election and still get elected And if he felt that way, then I think I felt that way, and that he shouldnt be in officeThis was such a fundamental deception.

Listen to Attig explain why he thought Adams should resign.

But if they did ask for Adams resignation, Sarasohn reflects, you have to consider why it is that youre asking him to resign. Is it because he had sex with a teenager? Thats tacky, but if his most recent story holds up, not illegal. Caldwell worried that even if the board cited the lie, rather than the affair itself, as the reason Adams should resign, readers might misinterpret their stance. Caldwell says:

I worried that people would think that we based this recommendation on the fact that he had had this affair with such a young person, or more broadly, that we had based this argument on the fact that he had had an affair with anybody , or anybody of the same sex.

Nielsen, meanwhile, leaned toward calling for Adams resignation but was wary. She says that she reflected: Are we overreacting, for whatever reason, either as a group or individually, and are [we] overreacting because its a surprise?

Are [we] overreacting because hes gay? Are [we] overreacting because hes a new mayor?... You dont want to overreact and you want to think about [the] long-term credibility of the newspaper as an institution and of the editorial board, and you dont want to just call for peoples resignations willy-nilly, because over the course of 10 years, a lot of people screw up, and you cant just call for everybodys resignation.

Kitch, who as the Oregonian s lead writer on Portland politics had personally covered Adams for several years, was disgusted by Adams lie. But she was also deeply disappointed that Portland might lose a much-needed leader. She remarks:

There was such a pent-up longing for an activist mayor, and we suddenly had one. Because he actually won in the primary, hed had six months of lead time when he was revving up to be mayor. So he had a lot of rehearsal time where we saw him on the stage, and we saw him getting ready and doing all the right sort of things. And, because of that, when this came out, I think the first response that many people had, quite understandably, was, this is crushing There really isnt anyone saddled up and ready to go in these directions. And so there was a calculation about, well, do we just forget all of that and bet on a new horse, or do we say, heck, this guys too good to lose? [1]

What kind of editorial would best serve their readers? How much weight should Caldwell afford anticipated reader reaction in choosing the Oregonian s editorial stance? Was their responsibility merely to state an opinion on the matter or should their work be guided by some other principle? What effect would demanding Adams resignation have in the gay community, and should the board take a possible backlash into account? It was Caldwells decision.