The Baker City Council can take a collective breath and relax.

That, at least, is something we hope they can agree about.

The Council has dealt with the most pressing matter on its agenda by hiring Steve Bogart as city manager for at least the next year.

This was a wise decision.

It’s budget-planning season for the city, and overseeing that process is one of the manager’s main duties.

Bogart knows how to do that. He worked on the city budget during his 2004-05 stint as manager while Jerry Gillham was serving with the National Guard in Iraq.

In any case the Council had to get a commitment from somebody.

The American Indian tribes of the Northwest gave up a lot when their leaders signed treaties with the U.S. government in the mid 19th century.

They gave up a lot of land, in particular.

But one thing the tribes, among them the Nez Perce and Umatilla, refused to surrender was a vital part of their culture and history: the right to hunt and fish and gather roots and berries, just as they ancestors had for millennia.

In exchange for their comparatively small reservations, the tribes sold, or ceded, millions of acres of their traditional homelands to the government.

The Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla, for instance, accepted in their 1855 treaty a 172,000-acre reservation, but ceded more than 6 million acres in Northeastern Oregon and Southeastern Washington.

But that treaty, in common with those that most other tribes in the region signed, also guarantees tribal members the right to hunt and fish.

If you’ve paid much attention to reactions to the Supreme Court’s recent ruling regarding campaign spending on federal elections, you’d be forgiven for believing that the high court had decided that your vote counts for less than it used to.

Also that corporations and unions now get to vote too.

We don’t think the effects of the ruling will be nearly so dire, or so undemocratic.

Firstly, we can’t see how a ruling that frees groups as different as corporations and labor unions to lavish even more of their millions on political campaigns is likely to tilt the odds steeply in either direction.

Critics of the 5-4 opinion, among them President Obama, argue that overturning provisions of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform law sullies the sanctity of the electoral process.

Obama: The ruling will result in a “stampede of special interest money in our politics.”

Does the president believe the vast fortunes already spent on campaigns (including his own successful one in 2008) are for something other than a “special interest?”

Every dollar that goes into a campaign is for a special interest — to elect a “special” candidate or to pass a “special” piece of legislation or ballot measure.

If you prefer reading material that prickles the back of your neck and prompts you to sleep with the lights on, forget Stephen King.

Get a copy of Phil Keisling’s report about Oregon’s public employees retirement system.

Keisling, the former Oregon Secretary of State, didn’t rely on fictional monsters to scare readers.

He didn’t need to.

The reality of PERS is far more frightening than any beast even a master storyteller like King could conjure.

Imagine an entity with a voracious appetite for tax dollars.

And not a penny of that money will shorten the lines at the DMV or reduce class sizes at your local school or put a fresh layer of asphalt on a highway.

In fact, every penny will go to retired public employees and so won’t be available to provide any of those vital “services” we heard so much about during the Measures 66/67 campaign.

We don’t dispute that.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service first listed the bull trout as a threatened species in 1998.

According to fish biologists, the bull trout’s plight has in general worsened in the ensuing 12 years.

As a result, the Fish and Wildlife Service proposed earlier this month to add thousands of miles of streams in Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Montana and Nevada to the current roster of “critical habitat” for bull trout. That list includes more than 200 miles in Baker County.

Sounds logical so far.

Snow berms are a seasonal problem on certain Baker City streets, but potholes and cracks bother us year round.

Which is why we urge the City Council to be cautious as it considers a proposal to spend more money to remove berms.

We don’t oppose the concept in general. We don’t like the berms, either. Most worrisome, they can block drivers’ views of oncoming traffic.

But the city should deal with berms on a case-by-case basis rather than revamp the current policy and require public works crews to haul away snow berms as soon as possible after every storm.

City officials estimate that doing so would cost the city an extra $20,000 to $25,000 during an average winter.

That’s a significant increase over the approximately $70,000 the city sets aside for snow and ice control each year.

The bigger problem, though, is that if the city spends more money moving snow, then it’s likely to have less money to maintain its paved streets — and those have been deteriorating for more than a decade.

We understand all too well that propaganda, rather than irrefutable facts, fuels political campaigns.

In the case of Measures 66/67, which Oregon voters must decide on by Jan. 26, both sides are predicting dire consequences should voters fail to heed their advice.

But nobody knows — or can know — for certain what will happen in either case.

It’s true that if voters defeat the measures, then the Legislature will have to decide next month how to balance the state budget.

It’s also true that if Measure 67 passes, some businesses will have to deal with being taxed based on their gross sales rather than their net profit.

What concerns us is that both campaigns have in some cases treated “could” and “will” as synonymous terms.

For instance, a press release from Vote Yes for Oregon states that if the measures fail, “Vulnerable children, seniors, people with disabilities and the unemployed will also be hit hard.”

The press release also contends that “every resident in Baker County will be affected” by cuts in state services if the measures go down.

That’s blatant, irresponsible fear-mongering.

We’d like to know why three of the seven Baker City Council members didn’t want to hire Tim Johnson as city manager.

We know part of the answer: The Idaho firm the city hired to investigate Johnson’s background recommended the City Council not offer him the job.

But city residents are entitled to the whole answer.

To that end, we’ve petitioned District Attorney Matt Shirtcliff  to order city officials to give us the complete background report compiled by Freeman and Associates of Middleton.

Even though the public’s money — about $1,500 — paid for that information, city officials contend that the public shouldn’t see everything their money bought.

Specifically, interim City Manager Tim Collins, in a letter responding to the Herald’s request for the complete report, wrote that the city will not release information that “consists generally of statements from previous co-workers, supervisors, and neighbors regarding Mr. Johnson’s work history and personal character.”

Nor did the city supply the Herald with the part of the report in which Freeman and Associates recommended the City Council not hire Johnson.

Few foibles embarrass politicians as much as the revelation that they failed to vote.

We understand why this is so.

The hypocrisy is so rich that it’s practically irresistible for media pundits.

Sure, candidate A. You want me to vote for you. Do as I say, not as I don’t, right?

A few weeks ago Chris Dudley, the former Portland Trail Blazer who’s running for Oregon governor as a Republican, publicly apologized after The Oregonian reported that he had failed to vote in seven of the past 13 elections for which he was eligible.

In a nod to fairness, the Portland newspaper followed that report by publishing the voting records of the other gubernatorial candidates.

Of the six major candidates, only one — Democrat Bill Bradbury — had voted in every possible election since 1994.

Although we think candidates’ voting records should be reported, we caution voters against making too much of the matter.

Turns out you don’t need to be a driver to benefit from the stimulus package that President Obama signed almost a year ago amid great fanfare about how the bill was going to smooth the nation’s potholed highway system.

In fact you don’t even need to be human.

Horses are getting a leg up from all those billions, too.

Actually they’ll get to keep their legs down.

A tiny fraction of the federal largess — $1.6 million — was sent to the Wallowa-Whitman National Forest to do the basic tasks necessary to keep backcountry hiking and horseback trails passable.

Specifically, passable to people (and horses) who don’t enjoy clambering over fallen trees or detouring around washouts.

The Wallowa-Whitman certainly can use the money.